Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   If we give the voters more choices they might like it   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Voting system, Voting, voter's minds, Plurality voting system, Elections, Approval voting, half of voters, majority of both parties  
•       •       •

3115 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Dec 2022 at 8:15 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



64 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-12-05 4:46:43 PM  
We have a democracy because we took the effort on a Christmas eve to murder those who opposed our democracy in their sleep.
20 more shopping days, people.
Let's get with it.
 
2022-12-05 7:09:23 PM  
My take
Either the writer is an idiot or lying
 
2022-12-05 8:16:14 PM  
Ranked Choice FTW!
 
2022-12-05 8:19:04 PM  

iheartscotch: Ranked Choice FTW!


Most of the choices would be rank, but hey it's the U.S..
 
2022-12-05 8:20:27 PM  
If we give voters more choices we might actually have to be responsive to what they want, rather than leaving them forced to choose us, rather than that other guy who is even worse, which might interfere with our ability to legislate on behalf of the special interests who send us giant checks.
 
2022-12-05 8:23:55 PM  
250 years of letting voters decide things brought us to where we are today.

Just saying.

It doesn't have to be like this.
 
2022-12-05 8:25:10 PM  
Registered Democrats, Republicans, and third-party voters disagree on quite a bit, but jarringly agree that our democracy is in jeopardy.

The problem is they think our democracy is in danger for widely different reasons.
 
2022-12-05 8:25:57 PM  
Democracy is under threat.  The problem is that Democrats are correctly pointing out that Republicans are threatening it, while Republicans think that SOROS and other (((globalists))) are the problem...along with the reverse vampires and the lizard people.

One side is correct, while the other is crazy.  That's not an acceptable way to run a country.
 
2022-12-05 8:27:05 PM  

Emposter: If we give voters more choices we might actually have to be responsive to what they want, rather than leaving them forced to choose us, rather than that other guy who is even worse, which might interfere with our ability to legislate on behalf of the special interests who send us giant checks.


So, circle the name of everyone EXCEPT the leftist? That sounds good to me.
 
2022-12-05 8:31:59 PM  

iheartscotch: Ranked Choice FTW!


The author of that article prefers approval voting over ranked choice. With approval voting, you vote for everyone you approve of on your ballot, and all your votes are counted equally. It has a lot of the same advantages as ranked choice, but the implementation is simpler -- the results are easier to calculate, and are generally more intuitive. But either is probably better than our current system.
 
2022-12-05 8:35:51 PM  
The majority of both parties believe the very fabric of government, the system upholding power to the people, is at risk.

Let that sink argumentum ad populum in.


I'm not saying that our democracy is not under threat (because it is), only that saying because a majority think something is true does not make it true. Or people can believe something is true and be right but believe for the wrong reasons (like Republicans believing democracy is under attack because they don't always win).
 
2022-12-05 8:37:33 PM  
Image from tfa:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-05 8:41:49 PM  

snowshovel: Emposter: If we give voters more choices we might actually have to be responsive to what they want, rather than leaving them forced to choose us, rather than that other guy who is even worse, which might interfere with our ability to legislate on behalf of the special interests who send us giant checks.

So, circle the name of everyone EXCEPT the leftist? That sounds good to me.


That's why the evil monsters at The Hill are writing about it. All a plot against Bernie.
 
2022-12-05 8:42:01 PM  
As to making it so voters have more choices; would those expanded choices be more moderate or more extreme or fringe than our current two choices? My bet is those extra choices would be more fringe and more unpalatable than what we have now because the way to get noticed nowadays is to be offensive or at minimum outrageous. The inoffensive and mild are largely ignored.
 
DVD
2022-12-05 8:42:57 PM  
Ranked Choice
 
2022-12-05 8:44:12 PM  
I still think you should have explicit choices for "None of the Above" & "Abstain."

People can argue what happens if None of the Above wins: A caretaker, or a re-vote with none of the same candidates or something else.
 
2022-12-05 8:44:57 PM  

baka-san: My take
Either the writer is an idiot or lying


Okay, but hear me out.............
 
2022-12-05 8:45:08 PM  

DVD: Ranked Choice


Doesn't matter, if Mr. Mark Ballot loses, the election was rigged.
 
2022-12-05 8:46:20 PM  
"Democracy is under threat; let's protect it with smart election reform"

Difficulty: we need the cooperation of the people benefiting from the current system to fix it, and there's no incentive for them to do so.
 
2022-12-05 8:48:18 PM  
Was there ever really a democracy, when for a large part of America's existence, only select groups of adults could vote? And it still stuns me to think that Jim Crow lasted up until the late 60's. Our democracy was farked from the get go, and that's why I feel that it's so easily subverted.
 
2022-12-05 8:50:38 PM  
I say this from a purely nonpartisan perspective. I'm not here to promote any matter of election denial, nor will I touch on gerrymandering.

As long as we're not addressing problems, I'm not going to talk about how awkward it is to have such an enormous penis.
 
2022-12-05 8:51:13 PM  

God_Almighty_Himself: 250 years of letting voters decide things brought us to where we are today.

Just saying.

It doesn't have to be like this.


Neither the House, Senate, Presidency, nor the SC is decided by the people. The SC isn't decided by the people at all. The Senate and Presidency are decided by the states, making land more represented than people. And the fixed number of House seats means land is more represented than people again.

Maybe we should try having an actual Democratic Republic first.
 
2022-12-05 8:53:45 PM  

andrewagill: I still think you should have explicit choices for "None of the Above" & "Abstain."

People can argue what happens if None of the Above wins: A caretaker, or a re-vote with none of the same candidates or something else.


And if "none of the above" wins, the election is held again, with none of the previous candidates being eligible.
 
2022-12-05 8:56:05 PM  

baka-san: My take
Either the writer is an idiot or lying


If I could vote on that, I would rank idiot above lying, but both would get my vote.
 
2022-12-05 8:57:44 PM  

skinink: Was there ever really a democracy, when for a large part of America's existence, only select groups of adults could vote? And it still stuns me to think that Jim Crow lasted up until the late 60's. Our democracy was farked from the get go, and that's why I feel that it's so easily subverted.


Yep. The country was formed by a bunch of privileged white men keeping power for themselves, and we're still fighting to try and overturn that.

/if you meet anyone who calls themselves a "Constitutional originalist" ask them why they support the beliefs of slave owners.
 
hej
2022-12-05 9:03:58 PM  
If the duopoly of political parties wanted you to have better options, you'd have them by now.
 
2022-12-05 9:06:19 PM  
Give me ranked choice voting and I'll love more choice.

Until then 3rd parties are spoilers and nothing more.
 
2022-12-05 9:08:19 PM  

Weatherkiss: Registered Democrats, Republicans, and third-party voters disagree on quite a bit, but jarringly agree that our democracy is in jeopardy.

The problem is they think our democracy is in danger for widely different reasons.


I think we can all agree that the reason democracy is under threat is gr...grooom.... Gremlins?
 
2022-12-05 9:13:36 PM  
The Founders were the first stupid people who thought they could solve politics by getting the politics out of politics. Consider for a moment that they thought there should be no political parties, yet they built a system that makes their existence pretty much a law of physics.

Guys just sucked.
 
2022-12-05 9:18:26 PM  

VanillaEnvelope: The Founders were the first stupid people who thought they could solve politics by getting the politics out of politics. Consider for a moment that they thought there should be no political parties, yet they built a system that makes their existence pretty much a law of physics.

Guys just sucked.


Well, they didn't think there should be no political parties, so...
 
2022-12-05 9:21:02 PM  

meat0918: Give me ranked choice voting and I'll love more choice.

Until then 3rd parties are spoilers and nothing more.


I've seen this sentiment a lot in this thread.  I agree with this sentiment.

Whatever the case, our current system is crap.  And since much of the country is pretty well fed up with this current system, this is probably the best time to go about fixing it.

We won't, of course.  But I can dream, can't I?
 
2022-12-05 9:21:57 PM  

baka-san: My take
Either the writer is an idiot or lying


It's The Hill AKA The Hitler Appreciation Society.
 
2022-12-05 9:22:59 PM  

Tyrone Slothrop: "Democracy is under threat; let's protect it with smart election reform"

Difficulty: we need the cooperation of the people benefiting from the current system to fix it, and there's no incentive for them to do so.


21 states have citizen initiated ballot measures that can be used to institute ranked choice without either party being involved. That's a decent start.
 
2022-12-05 9:27:41 PM  

meat0918: Give me ranked choice voting and I'll love more choice.

Until then 3rd parties are spoilers and nothing more.


Yep.

But I think about political reporters and political workers and I think that RCV also shows them way, way more than approval voting.
 
2022-12-05 9:33:26 PM  
FTA : "... And notice, I didn't say anything about ranking - a separate, complicated and expensive approach ... "

"ohnoez math is so complicated", ugh stop giving in to idiots. It's not the number of candidates, that's why primaries exist.  II's the method of selection that's encouraging polarization. Without implementing RCV, this article means nothing. "Moar candidates" is not election reform.

I've convinced conservative friends how RCV is better despite their aversion to math, even when including that it's not gonna cure cancer nor give everyone puppies and rainbows. So, it's not voters preventing RCV from taking root.
 
2022-12-05 9:33:47 PM  
One of the main reasons democracy is under duress right now is how sections of the public consume and respond to information they are presented with. It's important for a populace to stay informed, right? Right. How the different groups do this is important.
-
Not CNN because it's been goofy for awhile now. but if you go to any informational outlet that is not Fox flavored, the information is generally presented as some or all of the 5 W's: who, what, when, where, why (maybe). Generally it goes like:
1.) there's some information we think you should have
2.) here's what we have on the: who, what, when, where, why
3.) here's how it's affected some, or could affect you,
4.) (optional) here's some ways to take action based on that information

Example: "There's a hearing today before the Supreme Court concerning a ____ from ____ over the rights concerning _______. (more of the 5 W's) Here's how both sides feel on the issue, ____. It could affect _____ in these ways: ______."
-
Conversely, if you go to Right-wing information distributors, there's very little actual information being distributed (sometimes even indeed factually incorrect), and is accompanied with instructions on how the consumer is to feel about the small snippet offered. Generally, only 2 of the W's are presented, who, and the why is twisted in with the instructions on how the consumer is to feel. Typically the feel they project is anger, because it is easier to control someone with anger than with joy or love.

If that above sounds like it's lifted from 1970's government psyops manuals, it's because it is lol.
Generally, it looks like:
1.) there's some information we want you to be mad about
2.) here is a snippet of information, (often missing context, it hasn't been fact checked bc why bother)
3.) here's the Who to be mad at about it (spin a wheel consisting of: Left, Gays, Jews, teachers, Soros, etc)
4.) here's all the reasons you should be mad about it and ways to be mad about it
* step 4 will always be the bulk of the offering. In a 20 minute news segment, the information space is occupied for a very small sliver of time, with 15-19 minutes spent in the emotional or rhetoric space.

Example: "Today the Supreme Court hears a case about free speech, those radical leftists want to force good Christian patriots to make gay websites. ***then15 additional minutes how how "the gays" are ruining America, they're out to corrupt your kids, some dog whistles, lots of emotion words, negative feedback loop phrases, psyops type control words, propaganda, etc etc.***"
-

When the information production and consumption spaces are so fundamentally different, and where one is being manipulated by anger and propaganda, the natural outcome is exactly this type of duress. It's in the manuals lol. The US has been doing it to other countries for decades, we just didn't expect one of the two political parties to turn on their fellow Americans and use it on them.
 
2022-12-05 9:35:08 PM  

meat0918: Give me ranked choice voting and I'll love more choice.

Until then 3rd parties are spoilers and nothing more.


Yep. Add in publicly-funded elections, to boot; not only will that give more parties a shot at a seat at the table, but it'd take away a huge chunk of corporations' ability to bribe politicians.

/Not all of it, mind, that needs to be addressed elsewhere.
 
2022-12-05 9:36:40 PM  

sunarrow: Weatherkiss: Registered Democrats, Republicans, and third-party voters disagree on quite a bit, but jarringly agree that our democracy is in jeopardy.

The problem is they think our democracy is in danger for widely different reasons.

I think we can all agree that the reason democracy is under threat is gr...grooom.... Gremlins?


That would explain why democracy is supposed to die in darkness.
 
2022-12-05 9:36:55 PM  

rubi_con_man: meat0918: Give me ranked choice voting and I'll love more choice.

Until then 3rd parties are spoilers and nothing more.

Yep.

But I think about political reporters and political workers and I think that RCV also shows them way, way more than approval voting.


I still think approval voting is the best method for party primaries.
 
2022-12-05 9:37:05 PM  

VanillaEnvelope: The Founders were the first stupid people who thought they could solve politics by getting the politics out of politics. Consider for a moment that they thought there should be no political parties, yet they built a system that makes their existence pretty much a law of physics.

Guys just sucked.


To be fair to them, they had no contemporary democratic government to use as an example of what to and what not to do (other than their first attempt with the Articles of Confederation). It was almost inevitable they would get something wrong.
 
2022-12-05 9:37:10 PM  
(Crap that was way too long oops, been studying this for years lol. Sorry for the long post)
 
2022-12-05 9:50:58 PM  

Chthonic Echoes: sunarrow: Weatherkiss: Registered Democrats, Republicans, and third-party voters disagree on quite a bit, but jarringly agree that our democracy is in jeopardy.

The problem is they think our democracy is in danger for widely different reasons.

I think we can all agree that the reason democracy is under threat is gr...grooom.... Gremlins?

That would explain why democracy is supposed to die in darkness.


Don't feed democracy after midnight
 
2022-12-05 9:51:28 PM  

fullyautomatic: (Crap that was way too long oops, been studying this for years lol. Sorry for the long post)


You're momma.
 
2022-12-05 9:56:01 PM  

fullyautomatic: (Crap that was way too long oops, been studying this for years lol. Sorry for the long post)


No worries. You've got moxie. Put that same effort into Mark Ballot's political campaign and you'll be going places.
 
2022-12-05 10:14:19 PM  

jso2897: fullyautomatic: (Crap that was way too long oops, been studying this for years lol. Sorry for the long post)

You're momma.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-12-05 10:25:54 PM  
Ranked choice is a great idea, but it doesn't go far enough.

Money has to be eliminated from politics. Period. Every campaign for public office should be publicly funded.

With fast travel and instant communication, why do we still have geographical districts? Now, the only function they serve is to allow politicians to pick their voters, instead of the other way around.

There's no reason the house should be limited to 435. That was set a century ago. It's time to expand! 593 for the house would be a great number. The cubed root rule is a great option (It would be 693 for the population of the US, but I subtracted 100 because of the Senate)

All adults should be able to vote, even if they're currently incarcerated. Also, make it easy. A week for voting minimum, with drop boxes, mail-in ballots, and the ability to vote at any polling location, not just the one assigned to you. And make polling locations commonplace! With detailed voting guides provided to everybody. I recently learned that many states don't give you shiat w/r to a voter's guide, unlike California, which provides you non-partisan financial analysis, arguments in favor or against a proposition (And counter-arguments to those arguments!), plus the full text of the law. Too many states need to get their shiat together.

There's so much more that would help, too. Except term limits. Term limits are garbage for non-executive offices, and there are much better ways to achieve its goal without eliminating experience and giving lobbyists and un-elected staffers undue influence.
 
2022-12-05 10:28:11 PM  
How Ranked Choice Voting Can Save American Politics
Youtube oJoVFrBkBTw
 
2022-12-05 11:01:31 PM  

andrewagill: rubi_con_man: meat0918: Give me ranked choice voting and I'll love more choice.

Until then 3rd parties are spoilers and nothing more.

Yep.

But I think about political reporters and political workers and I think that RCV also shows them way, way more than approval voting.

I still think approval voting is the best method for party primaries.


Approval is a great way to cut down a huge field of candidates quickly and is perfect for the all in primaries that are spreading. Take the top 4  candidates or everyone over 50% to an RCV general and I think that's the best mix of both methods.
 
2022-12-05 11:33:50 PM  
I don't how the percentage turnout in primaries compares to the turnout in actual elections, but it seems that the primary tends to go to the candidate yelling the loudest. Middle of the road candidates who might actually be able to work across the aisle in Congress get pushed aside by those appealing to the common clay of the West.
 
2022-12-06 1:09:03 AM  
If it's "The Hill" suggesting that, they just want more nazi choices. The only subtlety those guys care about is how long to cook Jews.
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.