ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 4th March 2020, 08:46 AM   #41
SuburbanTurkey
Illuminator
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Norwood, MA
Posts: 3,292
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I've been giving it some thought.

If the goal is for the convention to at least approximate the will of the people, then there is a good chance that a candidate with a plurality (but not a majority) should NOT be the nominee.

Let's say, (removing names) that it breaks down like this:

Candidate A: 41% of delegates
Candidate B: 35% of delegates
Candidate C: 9% of delegates

Candidates who have dropped out: Remaining 15% of delegates

Even though candidate A has a clear plurality, the people who voted for candidate C and the dropped candidates likely break with a clear preference between A and B.

If the large majority who voted for C and dropped candidates favored Candidate B, then it WOULD be very much the will of the electorate that B becomes the nominee.

Something like ranked choice voting would make this much more clear (and eliminate some of the strategic voting that has marred this election). But the convention is the highly imperfect system we have to manage exactly this sort of preference issue.

I do fear that if Bernie is candidate A in this scenario and the DNC gives the nom to Biden, even if it is the will of the people, Bernie supporters will take their ball and go home.
The best option is for Warren Candidate C to drop out early enough in the race so we don't have to try and guess what her voters would have wanted as a second choice.

The primaries aren't set up in a way that makes it clear who people who voted for nonviable candidates would have preferred as a second choice. Any reallocating of delegates for reasons you detailed is going to be nearly impossible to distinguish from backroom dealing.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 08:48 AM   #42
Cabbage
Master Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,465
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I wonder if ranked choice voting would make things too clear. It seems like it's obvious solution, so the fact that it hasn't been implemented suggests to me that maybe I'm looking at the wrong problem. Maybe the party sees some benefit in abstracting the plain will of the party membership via brokering.


You vote for members of a party that routinely supports efforts of voter suppression and you are surprised an obvious solution like ranked choice voting isn't implemented???

Willful Ignorance.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 08:49 AM   #43
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 25,917
She'll probably be out today, Bloomberg already is. Gonna be creepy Uncle Joe.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 08:55 AM   #44
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,712
In an ideal world everyone would be able to go into a voting booth and cast as their first vote something that says basically: "This person right here is the person I think is the best person to put into this position. I am saying this based on my own personal morals, codes, and priorities and I saw this without factoing in real world factors" without to vote being counterproductive to those values. This is what everyone should be able to do as in their role as a voice in a Democracy.

Yes First Past the Post / Winner Talk All Voting system are fundemantally broken beacause they force "Good enough" to be the enemy of "Perfect" and vice versa and in these systems unified bad will always win to divided good.

So if you're 100% pro-Bleen voter and you're choices are between a popular 80% Bleen Candidate, an unpopular 100% pro-Bleen candidate, and a 100% anti-Bleen candidate you can't vote for the 100% pro-Bleen candidate because that just increases the chances of 100% anti-Bleen candidate getting the big seat.

And that's a messed up system.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 4th March 2020 at 08:58 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 08:56 AM   #45
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 42,740
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
You vote for members of a party that routinely supports efforts of voter suppression and you are surprised an obvious solution like ranked choice voting isn't implemented???
We're talking about the DNC having a brokered convention to choose their nominee. Feel free to speculate about the GOP's process in its own thread.

Unless you're referring to the DNC here?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 08:57 AM   #46
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
The best option is for Warren Candidate C to drop out early enough in the race so we don't have to try and guess what her voters would have wanted as a second choice.

The primaries aren't set up in a way that makes it clear who people who voted for nonviable candidates would have preferred as a second choice. Any reallocating of delegates for reasons you detailed is going to be nearly impossible to distinguish from backroom dealing.
When "A" and "B" are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and so nearly evenly divided, a win for either of them is going to result in more harm than good. That is pretty basic negotiations.

Not having a "C" that is acceptable to everyone to act as a unifier is a terrible idea. Guaranteed to produce rancor that will continue to poison our chances right up until the general.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:02 AM   #47
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,415
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I wonder if ranked choice voting would make things too clear. It seems like it's obvious solution, so the fact that it hasn't been implemented suggests to me that maybe I'm looking at the wrong problem. Maybe the party sees some benefit in abstracting the plain will of the party membership via brokering.
RCV would seriously curtail the power of Parties - it might even make them obsolete.
__________________
ETTD
Everything Trump Touches Dies
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:34 AM   #48
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,394
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
When "A" and "B" are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and so nearly evenly divided, a win for either of them is going to result in more harm than good. That is pretty basic negotiations.

Not having a "C" that is acceptable to everyone to act as a unifier is a terrible idea. Guaranteed to produce rancor that will continue to poison our chances right up until the general.

That's mental.

A wants to kill all purple people
B doesn't want to

What kind of new hell middle ground do you think C is going to come up with? Kill half the purple people?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:37 AM   #49
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
That's mental.

A wants to kill all purple people
B doesn't want to

What kind of new hell middle ground do you think C is going to come up with? Kill half the purple people?
Well of course if you pick the most extreme examples...
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:39 AM   #50
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
That's mental.

A wants to kill all purple people
B doesn't want to

What kind of new hell middle ground do you think C is going to come up with? Kill half the purple people?
When either side sees the other side as morally equivalent to a genocide, the need for a middle ground is especially apparent.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:39 AM   #51
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,394
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Well of course if you pick the most extreme examples...
It serves to illustrate that the recent (and I thought fading) concept that, between two extreme views, there is a happy compromise available, most of the time, is utter, unmitigated ********.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:40 AM   #52
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
It serves to illustrate that the recent (and I thought fading) concept that, between two extreme views, there is a happy compromise available, most of the time, is utter, unmitigated ********.
It depends what you mean by extreme, really. I didn't think Distracted was talking about genocide.

But for stuff like healthcare, tax cuts, education, and the like, you bet there can be middle grounds. Sometimes no one is happy, but they can live with it, and that's how societies function.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:40 AM   #53
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
It serves to illustrate that the recent (and I thought fading) concept that, between two extreme views, there is a happy compromise available, most of the time, is utter, unmitigated ********.
The two ends of the self-selected Democratic Party are somehow representative of such dipoles?
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:42 AM   #54
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
It serves to illustrate that the recent (and I thought fading) concept that, between two extreme views, there is a happy compromise available, most of the time, is utter, unmitigated ********.
No, most of the time it allows society to function by being put into practice a million times a day.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:44 AM   #55
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
When either side sees the other side as morally equivalent to a genocide, the need for a middle ground is especially apparent.
What if there just isn't anybody who wants the middle ground? If 50% of the set wants A and 50% wants C it isn't necessarily true that compromising to B is the optimal solution. Splitting the set into two separate sets, one with A and one with C, is also a possibility. And if it makes more people happy then isn't that the optimal choice? Isn't a divorce sometimes a better solution than sticking in an unpleasant marriage?
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:45 AM   #56
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
What if there just isn't anybody who wants the middle ground? If 50% of the set wants A and 50% wants C it isn't necessarily true that compromising to B is the optimal solution. Splitting the set into two separate sets, one with A and one with C, is also a possibility. And if it makes more people happy then isn't that the optimal choice? Isn't a divorce sometimes a better solution than sticking in an unpleasant marriage?
Are you suggesting that the optimal result would be breaking up the Party?

Whose interest would that serve?
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

Last edited by Distracted1; 4th March 2020 at 10:04 AM.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:49 AM   #57
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19,394
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
It depends what you mean by extreme, really. I didn't think Distracted was talking about genocide.

But for stuff like healthcare, tax cuts, education, and the like, you bet there can be middle grounds. Sometimes no one is happy, but they can live with it, and that's how societies function.
Only sometimes. As a grand sweeping statement it's bollocks.

It works, a bit if one person thinks the tax rate should be 40% and someone else thinks it should be 35%, but as a grand sweeping statement - that the best option is the one in the middle, in most cases, it's just wrong.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

Last edited by 3point14; 4th March 2020 at 09:50 AM.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:54 AM   #58
Cabbage
Master Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,465
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
We're talking about the DNC having a brokered convention to choose their nominee. Feel free to speculate about the GOP's process in its own thread.

Unless you're referring to the DNC here?

Sorry, I assumed you were speaking more generally.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 09:56 AM   #59
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Only sometimes. As a grand sweeping statement it's bollocks.
Sure, but most sweeping statements are bollocks if you want to be pedantic. However I think we both understood what he meant.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:00 AM   #60
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 42,740
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Only sometimes. As a grand sweeping statement it's bollocks.

It works, a bit if one person thinks the tax rate should be 40% and someone else thinks it should be 35%, but as a grand sweeping statement - that the best option is the one in the middle, in most cases, it's just wrong.
Each party comes to the table with a list of demands. Some of them can be met. Some of them can be met but won't. Some of them can't be met.

The best option, in most cases, is for each party to make some concessions and get some concessions. For some demands, this might mean sliding a value to an acceptable midpoint between extremes on a continuum. For other demands, it might mean forgoing them completely in exchange for getting something else completely. Etc. It's not always a sliding scale type thing, and it's usually not just one demand that's being negotiated.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:03 AM   #61
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Are you suggesting that the optimal result would be breaking up the Party?

Who's interest would that serve?
The population that doesn't want B. Whether A or C is victor at least 50% will be happy, as opposed to 0%.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:04 AM   #62
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
The population that doesn't want B. Whether A or C is victor at least 50% will be happy, as opposed to 0%.
The usual goal of politics is not to make people happy, but to reach acceptable compromises. With this in mind you can go well beyond 50% in some cases.

By being inflexible you only serve one tribe.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:08 AM   #63
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
The population that doesn't want B. Whether A or C is victor at least 50% will be happy, as opposed to 0%.
You are forgetting that, in this instance, both groups have a goal beyond A or B that is completely destroyed by making that %50 happy.
In fact, I should think the 50% would be decidedly un-happy as well with the failure of that goal.

So, no, splitting up the party is the least utilitarian outcome.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:13 AM   #64
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
You are forgetting that, in this instance, both groups have a goal beyond A or B that is completely destroyed by making that %50 happy.
In fact, I should think the 50% would be decidedly un-happy as well with the failure of that goal.

So, no, splitting up the party is the least utilitarian outcome.
So 100% of the population must be unhappy all of the time. It makes me wonder why anyone bothers at all.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:15 AM   #65
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
So 100% of the population must be unhappy all of the time.
Are you ever actually happy with your government?

Presumably you've lived with humans before and know how this stuff works.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:16 AM   #66
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 42,740
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Sorry, I assumed you were speaking more generally.
More generally as in, the Democratic party is also "a party that routinely supports efforts of voter suppression"?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:20 AM   #67
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Are you ever actually happy with your government?

Presumably you've lived with humans before and know how this stuff works.
Ah, you mistake what is for what must be. The same arguments were made to support the monarchies when those were things. And god-kings before that. And probably shaman-chiefs before that.

Change is possible, improvement is possible. Aren't we better off now than a century ago? Why insist that conditions are immutable when we've got a proven track record of successful change?
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:20 AM   #68
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,712
The thing is for all the talk of "LOL that's such a strawman position" there are cases, not the norm perhaps but not weird fringe cases either, where we do exactly that.

"We think stem cells might represent the biggest move forward in health since the invention of vaccines."
"We are against stem cells because currently they are harvested from fetal tissue and we are against abortion."

The solution? Keep aborting the fetus but don't use the stem cells. Nobody is winning in that scenario by their own terms regardless of which side we think is the correct one.

Sure if you're the kind of guy who thinks we should tax Fedoras at 21% and you're talking to someone who thinks we should tax them at 22% and you'd rather tear the Union asunder then agree on 21.5%... yeah you're probably a douche knuckle.

But there is no, or less, compromise on base human rights and certain other disagreements.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:22 AM   #69
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Ah, you mistake what is for what must be. The same arguments were made to support the monarchies when those were things. And god-kings before that. And probably shaman-chiefs before that.

Change is possible, improvement is possible. Aren't we better off now than a century ago? Why insist that conditions are immutable when we've got a proven track record of successful change?
Who said anything about immutable? I don't think you understood my point, so I'll clarify:

Why would you prefer 50% of people happy on a few policies and 50% decidedly furious to 90% comfortable but not entirely happy about the lot of the policies? The latter is much more stable and functional. It has nothing to do with whether things can change. In fact, change is integral to finding new compromises.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:23 AM   #70
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,712
Also "Everyone goes away unhappy" makes perfect sense if you assume "Spite" is becoming a major factor in politics which I think is... likely.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:28 AM   #71
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Who said anything about immutable? I don't think you understood my point, so I'll clarify:

Why would you prefer 50% of people happy on a few policies and 50% decidedly furious to 90% comfortable but not entirely happy about the lot of the policies? The latter is much more stable and functional. It has nothing to do with whether things can change. In fact, change is integral to finding new compromises.
Because I don't agree with the assumption that 90% will be comfortable in the space between the two poles.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:28 AM   #72
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,485
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I wonder if ranked choice voting would make things too clear. It seems like it's obvious solution, so the fact that it hasn't been implemented suggests to me that maybe I'm looking at the wrong problem. Maybe the party sees some benefit in abstracting the plain will of the party membership via brokering.
Range voting is generally superior. The typical explanation not to deploy alternative voting systems is the fear they are "too complicated."
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:31 AM   #73
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Because I don't agree with the assumption that 90% will be comfortable in the space between the two poles.
Again, I'm sure you're not an alien who's meeting humans for the first time, so you must be aware that people are generally meh-okay with the way things are, and that this is better than 50% being angry with the system all the time?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:32 AM   #74
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Range voting is generally superior. The typical explanation not to deploy alternative voting systems is the fear they are "too complicated."
Seeing how many voters voted yesterday for someone who dropped out of the race the day before it may well be the truth. The masses are simply too stupid for complex things.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:32 AM   #75
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,725
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Also "Everyone goes away unhappy" makes perfect sense if you assume "Spite" is becoming a major factor in politics which I think is... likely.
It is only children who can manage unhappiness when they are given in to less than 100%.

And Trump, of course.

The rest of us find value in compromise.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:33 AM   #76
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Again, I'm sure you're not an alien who's meeting humans for the first time, so you must be aware that people are generally meh-okay with the way things are, and that this is better than 50% being angry with the system all the time?
Most people favor either male or female sexual partners. Do you think that 90% of the population would be comfortable with an intersexed partner because it's a compromise partly incorporating what they actually want?
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:35 AM   #77
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,910
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Most people favor either male or female sexual partners. Do you think that 90% of the population would be comfortable with an intersexed partner because it's a compromise partly incorporating what they actually want?
That doesn't even make sense. That's worlds away from what we're talking about.

You do understand that the 90% figure was just an example, right? Same as your 50%. You seem to be dodging my main point.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:36 AM   #78
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That doesn't even make sense. That's worlds away from what we're talking about.

You do understand that the 90% figure was just an example, right? Same as your 50%. You seem to be dodging my main point.
I'm disagreeing with your premise. I don't think most people are happy with how things are, I don't think most people would be happier with a compromise.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:38 AM   #79
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,712
Okay seriously raise your hand if "Some things people will compromise on because the represent a spectrum" and "Some they will not because they represent an absolute" is too complicated to understand.

People will compromise on somethings but not others. Does anyone disagree with that?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 10:38 AM   #80
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 54,415
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay seriously raise your hand if "Some things people will compromise on because the represent a spectrum" and "Some they will not because they represent an absolute" is too complicated to understand.

People will compromise on somethings but not others. Does anyone disagree with that?
Let's compromise and half-agree to fifty percent of that.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.