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.

(AP)   Democratic Party, 2000: "The GOP stole our votes in Florida." 2007: "If Florida holds its Democratic primary too early to suit us, we'll throw the votes away"   (apnews.myway.com) divider line
73
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

654 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Aug 2007 at 3:18 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



73 Comments     (+0 »)


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

 
2wolves [TotalFark]
2007-08-26 11:03:02 AM  
Subby, can you grasp the difference?
 
Saborlas [TotalFark]
2007-08-26 11:16:16 AM  
Subby can't even spell "suit." So, I'd say no.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-08-26 11:21:04 AM  
FTFA:

The Florida party has 30 days to submit an alternative to its planned Jan. 29 primary or lose its 210 delegates to the nominating convention in Denver next summer.

The state party chairwoman, Karen Thurman, said she would confer with state officials about the ultimatum. "It's going to be a difficult discussion," she said, because Floridians are wary of having their votes taken away.

/gee, ya think?
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-08-26 11:23:39 AM  
submitter: "If Florida holds its Democratic primary too early to sui us

Saborlas: Subby can't even spell "suit."

Maybe it's supposed to mean this:

American Heritage Abbreviations Dictionary 3rd Edition - Cite This Source
SUI
stress urinary incontinence

The American Heritage® Abbreviations Dictionary, Third Edition
Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sui
 
keylock71
2007-08-26 11:24:11 AM  
"One of these things is not like the other...oone of these things does not belong..."
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-08-26 11:28:49 AM  
keylock71: one of these things does not belong..."

1. The GOP (allegedly) discards votes in Florida in 2000.
2. The DNC (deliberately and loudly) threatens to throw away votes in Florida in 2008.

Sorry; I'm not clear on this. Which one DOES belong?
 
CougarJeff
2007-08-26 11:34:31 AM  
submitter: sui

"Yes? You called?"
iptv.orgView Full Size
 
JohnnyC
2007-08-26 11:42:26 AM  
First and foremost... We don't need Florida to have a more prominent voice in nominating candidates for the Presidency. Perhaps instead of trying to dig their fingers deeper into national issues, they should focus on the main issue of making sure their votes are accurately counted when it comes time to actually vote in the Presidential election instead of the nominations. There are already rules that they have that set guidelines for dates on when different states can participate in the nomination process... Florida (the great vote farker-uppers) now wants a greater stake in the nomination process. Screw that... I already don't trust Florida and don't even want them to be a major player in the selection of candidate for nomination.

MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: I'm not clear on this.

That is painfully obvious.
 
mheuss
2007-08-26 11:52:51 AM  
As a floridian - I got to say that I side with the National Party on this. States all around the country keep moving their elections up - all in an effort to give there state more say. If the parties let the states get away with this - and please forgive the slight exaggeration - we are shortly going to be deciding the 2050 primary in 2010 .

I also would like to point out the ultimatum does give the florida democrats a way out- they simply have to move their election to a later date. So they have a choice - they just don't like it.
 
JohnnyC
2007-08-26 11:58:44 AM  
mheuss: I also would like to point out the ultimatum does give the florida democrats a way out- they simply have to move their election to a later date. So they have a choice - they just don't like it.

It certainly does. So... essentially the only people who would be willfully throwing away votes would be the people of Florida, since they have an option NOT to throw away their votes.

I also agree on the timetable business. We don't need states trying to 1-up each other on the dates just to have a greater stake. Being from Michigan, I don't think Michigan's primary voting should be moved ahead at all.

For the record... Michigan did not go to Bush in either election. Nor did we have any serious allegations of voter fraud, intimidation, and lost votes, hanging chads, or whatever. We voted, we accurately counted our votes and we did it smoothly.

Florida... Not so much.
 
Guy Innagorillasuit
2007-08-26 12:02:03 PM  
F*ck the primaries. I think the parties should pay for the damn things themselves and run them in whatever shiatty way they see fit.
 
Afternoon_Delight
2007-08-26 12:58:08 PM  
The liberal rage in this thread is going to be hilarious! They're attacking each other so they have to lash out at everyone else as well.

B-B-B-Bush! Beautiful.

[image from i11.tinypic.com too old to be available]
 
Confabulat [TotalFark]
2007-08-26 1:10:23 PM  
The primary system in this country is some kind of screwed up. I'm not registered with a political party, which means that effectively, I'm removed from a significant portion of the election process. Since only wingnuts get to choose the Big Two candidates, we essentially have to hope the crazies choose someone who's not too awful.

This system gave us G.W. Bush, though, and probably Hillary Clinton, so it obviously fails to give us quality candidates that appeal to most Americans.

A person should not have to sign up to be a member of a faction in order to participate in federal politics.
 
dletter
2007-08-26 1:19:33 PM  
Well, there is that issue Confabulat, and then the issue at the heart of this article, which is that the "segmented" system of running in various states throughout a few months

It makes for entertaining news fodder ("oooh, looks, someone we didn't expect took Iowa", "Well, the front runner got NH back, but look who was in 2nd!", and so on), but, it isn't really fair to various states, since other than the first 10-12 states, the other states don't have a say in their parties nomination process.

But, the whole thing is basically a scam, since as was said, its basically a closed system that the two parties each hold, and they decide who they squeeze out of their tube and onto the ballot. If it were up to me, we'd abolish political parties on ballots, and make it much easier (not "super easy", but, much less hurdles than now) to get on ballots (president on down) to run.

Of course, it isn't up to me (or you), its up to the people who want to keep power. So, past a huge revolt or something, nothing will change. But, it will be entertaining news fodder.
 
JohnnyC
2007-08-26 1:22:19 PM  
Afternoon_Delight: The liberal rage in this thread is going to be hilarious! They're attacking each other so they have to lash out at everyone else as well.

B-B-B-Bush! Beautiful.

Your brain is broken... I just thought I would let you know, because you seem oblivious to it.
 
SilentStrider
2007-08-26 1:27:28 PM  
JohnnyC: Your brain is broken... I just thought I would let you know, because you seem oblivious to it.

I'd say let him have his delusions, if only we didn't have to put up with the mess people cause when they try to force the world to conform to their delusions.
 
Gosling
2007-08-26 2:30:16 PM  
This isn't even partisan. The GOP's threatening the exact same thing to their half of Florida. Both sides are pissed at their Floridians, and both halves of Floridians are thumbing their nose and going pbhhbtpthpbtptphtbphbh.

It's too late for this election cycle, but both sides are clearly fed up and clearly want to do something to end this bullshiat. Encourage them to do so for 2012.
 
colovion
2007-08-26 3:24:24 PM  
Confabulat: The primary system in this country is some kind of screwed up. I'm not registered with a political party, which means that effectively, I'm removed from a significant portion of the election process.

You've said before that you live in Michigan, right? Since 1995 Michigan has had an "open" primary system. In other words, you can't register as a Republican or Democrat in Michigan, you simply register to vote. There was actually a lawsuit filed by a Michigan resident in 1991 arguing that closed primaries are Unconstitutional. The Circuit Court agreed, but this was overturned by the Appeals Court and that decision was upheld by the Supreme Court. In any case, Michigan switched to open primaries and has remained that way ever since.

Interstingly enough, the Democratic Party has a rule against open primaries (the Republican Party has no such rule), so there is technically no Democratic Primary in Michigan but rather it is a Democratic Caucus. Seems that the Democratic Party has a history of being afraid of Democracy eh?
 
wydok
2007-08-26 3:35:53 PM  
Presidential primaries should happen in every state the same day. As someone who lives in Pennsylvania, I know that my primary vote never matters.
 
SeismicJizzer
2007-08-26 3:44:55 PM  
Wouldn't this problem be solved by implementing that the states take turns voting first at each election cycle?
 
Afternoon_Delight
2007-08-26 3:49:41 PM  
colovion: Seems that the Democratic Party has a history of being afraid of Democracy eh?


That would be correct.
 
Gunther
2007-08-26 3:57:42 PM  
Afternoon_Delight:

... You do realize that 1) the Republicans are doing this too, and 2) There's nothing actually wrong with either party doing this? Florida wants to hold it's primaries earlier than it is supposed to in an attempt to wield more electoral "sway", something that both parties (and everyone in this thread who understands the issue) think is wrong.
 
turboeli
2007-08-26 4:00:25 PM  
Subby appears to be ignorant of rudimentary causality or discerning a lack thereof.
 
BooBoo23
2007-08-26 4:08:12 PM  
wydok: Presidential primaries should happen in every state the same day. As someone who lives in Pennsylvania, I know that my primary vote never matters.

Agreed. Mine in NC hasn't mattered, and mine in AL certainly never mattered.
 
cirby
2007-08-26 4:10:21 PM  
The funny thing was how some Florida papers portrayed the primary vote as being forced through by Republicans, when all but one Democrat voted for it, too...
 
SeismicJizzer
2007-08-26 4:11:24 PM  
Gunther: Afternoon_Delight:

... You do realize that 1) the Republicans are doing this too, and 2) There's nothing actually wrong with either party doing this? Florida wants to hold it's primaries earlier than it is supposed to in an attempt to wield more electoral "sway", something that both parties (and everyone in this thread who understands the issue) think is wrong.

There is no point in trying to reason with this uber partisan troll
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 4:13:13 PM  
Okay, seriously, can everyone please fix the damn politics tab? Here's how you do it.

Total*farkers, put Mighty_Hellbent_Delight_Troll on ignore. Same goes for Bevets and FlashLV.
Everyone else, DO NOT RESPOND TO THE TROLLS.
 
Afternoon_Delight
2007-08-26 4:15:41 PM  
cirby: The funny thing was how some Florida papers portrayed the primary vote as being forced through by Republicans, when all but one Democrat voted for it, too...


Yeah, but 'everyone in this thread who understands the issue' (i.e. the humiliated democrats) think it's wrong.
 
Afternoon_Delight
2007-08-26 4:23:04 PM  
TheCid: Okay, seriously, can everyone please fix the damn politics tab? Here's how you do it. Total*farkers, put Mighty_Hellbent_Delight_Troll on ignore. Same goes for Bevets and FlashLV.


i10.tinypic.com
Liberals often want opposing voices to be silenced by force. Full story at 11:00
 
Atillathepun
2007-08-26 4:43:30 PM  
Afternoon_Delight:

Liberals Adults often want opposing voices rude children to be silenced by force. shut the hell up so the adults can have a rational conversation in peace. Full story at 11:00

FTFY
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 4:48:42 PM  
I never understood why primaries were held on different dates, but it is up to the parties. Each party has a base of voters who will probably vote for whomever has right letter next to their name, and the DNC and GOP are asking those people who they should put up as a candidate. Frankly, it's the voters who don't think on either side and just tow the party line that have screwed up the whole system.

/viable third party and run-offs FTW
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 4:53:11 PM  
Atillathepun: Afternoon_Delight:

Liberals Adults often want opposing voices rude children to be silenced by force. shut the hell up so the adults can have a rational conversation in peace. Full story at 11:00

FTFY

Thank you.

mathmonkey: I never understood why primaries were held on different dates, but it is up to the parties. Each party has a base of voters who will probably vote for whomever has right letter next to their name, and the DNC and GOP are asking those people who they should put up as a candidate. Frankly, it's the voters who don't think on either side and just tow the party line that have screwed up the whole system.

/viable third party and run-offs FTW

Run-offs aren't the way to do things. Concordet or Borda would be preferable. As well as nuking the entire "legislated support for the two biggest parties" thing.
 
The Only Good Moran
2007-08-26 5:03:38 PM  
Afternoon_Delight: The liberal rage in this thread is going to be hilarious! They're attacking each other so they have to lash out at everyone else as well.

B-B-B-Bush! Beautiful.

There's no worship like Bush worship.
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 5:03:54 PM  
TheCid:
Run-offs aren't the way to do things. Concordet or Borda would be preferable. As well as nuking the entire "legislated support for the two biggest parties" thing.

Run-Offs done the right way are better, IMO, than Borda and other counting methods. It's called "Plurality with elimination" and can be done with a single ballot. Just rank the same way you would for a Borda count. Plurality using everyone's first choice. If no majority, then drop the worst performing 1st choice and count those voters' 2nd as their new 1st. Continue until majority. I think it keeps the spirit of votes better than ranking methods do, but of course there's no perfect method.
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 5:11:26 PM  
mathmonkey: TheCid:
Run-offs aren't the way to do things. Concordet or Borda would be preferable. As well as nuking the entire "legislated support for the two biggest parties" thing.

Run-Offs done the right way are better, IMO, than Borda and other counting methods. It's called "Plurality with elimination" and can be done with a single ballot. Just rank the same way you would for a Borda count. Plurality using everyone's first choice. If no majority, then drop the worst performing 1st choice and count those voters' 2nd as their new 1st. Continue until majority. I think it keeps the spirit of votes better than ranking methods do, but of course there's no perfect method.

The problem is run-offs penalize the moderate candidates. Borda slightly favors the moderate candidates, and Codorcet is pretty well balanced.
I saw a thing a while back that actually compared them by putting candidates in random locations on an x-y graph, then comparing where everyone ranked it at each position from 1,1 to 100,100. With run-off, you would see weird stuff like the votes of the people closest to the candidate actually going to a different candidate, but the votes of those farther away would go to that one.
 
alostpacket
2007-08-26 5:13:05 PM  
i think run offs or no, primaries are certainly not good democracy, and to me i cant for the life of me understand why some state like iowa or flordia should get more of a say in them than a new york texas or a california. why don't they just hold them all on the same day? seems to me any party that did that would score major votes in the general election just for simply being practical.
 
IlGreven
2007-08-26 5:18:44 PM  
...I'm sorry, this "We need to be the first primary" bullshiat is getting out of hand. It's ulitmately about reducing voter turnout by making people forget about it. That way, only the truly important (who will have been informed ahead of time, of course) will vote.

...I think it's getting bad enough that we need the federal government to step in and make a Primary day. Something like the first Tuesday after the first Monday in April, the polls in each state will be open for any primaries, from presidential to dog catcher. It'll be okay to hold special primaries on other days, but Primary Day will be the official and only day that presidential delegates will be determined.
 
lolmao666
2007-08-26 5:19:44 PM  
The republicans didn't steal those votes, Al Gore was a coward and give his place to Bush, just like he was supposed to do.

US Election = Theater
 
INeedAName
2007-08-26 5:25:09 PM  
AfternoonDelight makes me smile.

How's the world look from your point of view? Y'know, seeing only what O'Reilly tells you to look at.
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 5:25:53 PM  
IlGreven: ...I'm sorry, this "We need to be the first primary" bullshiat is getting out of hand. It's ulitmately about reducing voter turnout by making people forget about it. That way, only the truly important (who will have been informed ahead of time, of course) will vote.

...I think it's getting bad enough that we need the federal government to step in and make a Primary day. Something like the first Tuesday after the first Monday in April, the polls in each state will be open for any primaries, from presidential to dog catcher. It'll be okay to hold special primaries on other days, but Primary Day will be the official and only day that presidential delegates will be determined.

Because we need the federal government FURTHER solidifying our messed up two-party system?
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 5:28:20 PM  
TheCid:
The problem is run-offs penalize the moderate candidates. Borda slightly favors the moderate candidates, and Codorcet is pretty well balanced.
I saw a thing a while back that actually compared them by putting candidates in random locations on an x-y graph, then comparing where everyone ranked it at each position from 1,1 to 100,100. With run-off, you would see weird stuff like the votes of the people closest to the candidate actually going to a different candidate, but the votes of those farther away would go to that one.

I've never heard that run-offs penalize moderates, so I'd like to see something on that. Voting math is awesome stuff.
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 5:30:07 PM  
alostpacket: i think run offs or no, primaries are certainly not good democracy, and to me i cant for the life of me understand why some state like iowa or flordia should get more of a say in them than a new york texas or a california. why don't they just hold them all on the same day? seems to me any party that did that would score major votes in the general election just for simply being practical.

AFAIK the parties like CA to have it last so one candidate is chosen by the time the party gets to the state to raise money. There's so much to be had from a state like CA that they want it all to go to one guy.
 
mpirooz
2007-08-26 5:31:12 PM  
I think Afternoon_Delight was the Subby... it only makes sense.
 
mpirooz
2007-08-26 5:33:29 PM  
lolmao666: The republicans didn't steal those votes, Al Gore was a coward and give his place to Bush, just like he was supposed to do.

US Election = Theater

I think I understand your satire... however I don't understand your name. To spell it out, laugh out loud my ass off six six six... are you twelve or did you just hit your head before you made your name?
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 5:37:45 PM  
mathmonkey: TheCid:
The problem is run-offs penalize the moderate candidates. Borda slightly favors the moderate candidates, and Codorcet is pretty well balanced.
I saw a thing a while back that actually compared them by putting candidates in random locations on an x-y graph, then comparing where everyone ranked it at each position from 1,1 to 100,100. With run-off, you would see weird stuff like the votes of the people closest to the candidate actually going to a different candidate, but the votes of those farther away would go to that one.

I've never heard that run-offs penalize moderates, so I'd like to see something on that. Voting math is awesome stuff.


Okay , I don't have the link so let's just go with 3 candidates on a scale from 1 to 100.

The moderate is at 50. The "extreme" candidates are at 30 and 71.
Now, all the candidates from 1 to 45 are going to vote for the 30, all the candidates from 61 to 100 are going to vote for the 71.
46-60 vote for 50.
The moderate loses out, the runoff is between 30 and 71, 30 wins by 1 vote.
Obviously this assumes a uniform population ranging from 1 to 100, but you get the idea.
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 5:38:55 PM  
That should say "all the voters from 1 to 45 are going to vote for the candidate at 30..."
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 5:53:31 PM  
TheCid: The moderate is at 50. The "extreme" candidates are at 30 and 71.
Now, all the candidates from 1 to 45 are going to vote for the 30, all the candidates from 61 to 100 are going to vote for the 71.

You're making assumptions about how people will vote that don't really have anything to do with the voting method itself. Who's to say everyone in the 1-45 range are voting for the extreme candidate? If they do, then it's an indication that the people prefer an extreme rather than a moderate, and it's probable that just about everyone will be unhappy with a moderate. Run-off (P w/ E) is great because lots of people get their first choice, and most of the rest get their second choice.
 
TheCid
2007-08-26 6:03:51 PM  
mathmonkey: TheCid: The moderate is at 50. The "extreme" candidates are at 30 and 71.
Now, all the candidates from 1 to 45 are going to vote for the 30, all the candidates from 61 to 100 are going to vote for the 71.

You're making assumptions about how people will vote that don't really have anything to do with the voting method itself. Who's to say everyone in the 1-45 range are voting for the extreme candidate? If they do, then it's an indication that the people prefer an extreme rather than a moderate, and it's probable that just about everyone will be unhappy with a moderate. Run-off (P w/ E) is great because lots of people get their first choice, and most of the rest get their second choice.

I'm assuming that everyone will vote for the candidate closest to them. What happens in the scenario I'm outlining is that NOBODY gets their second choice because the moderate is instantly excluded.

The assumption, of course, is that the population is uniform. With a normally distributed population (say mean 50 stdev 5) , the candidate in the middle has enough of an advantage to overcome the disadvantage, but you can just as easily screw that up by going with options at 45/50/56. (45 wins, 50 has no chance)

IRV shafts the moderates.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method#An_example
Scroll down to the bottom of the Condorcet example and you'll see how it works out.

Here's Borda:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borda_voting#An_example
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 6:14:49 PM  
TheCid: I'm assuming that everyone will vote for the candidate closest to them.

I do know how the different methods work.
I guess I don't see why 1-45 would all vote for 30 if 50 is closer to some of them. Try:
1-40 for 30
41-60 for 50
61-100 for 71, so still runoff for a and c, and probably a stalemate.

Then remember that the political spectrum isn't one-dimensional and the assumption that people will vote for the candidate closest to them depends on the metric. Maybe only 1-30 would consider voting for the 30, and everyone from 31 to 70 prefers a moderate. It's tough to quantify candidates, let alone voters. If we're going with your distribution and assuming a valid metric, though, try Pairwise-Comparison (Round-Robin or "Cage Match" as I call it in class). Still superior to the numerical ranking methods. IMO, of course. It's still subjective.
 
mathmonkey
2007-08-26 6:16:47 PM  
And by pairwise I mean Condorcet. Sorry, I spaced. Still prefer run-off.
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments


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



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

Want more stories with less ads? Try

TotalFark

It's what the cool kids are doing.
It also helps us pay the bills.

learn more | sign up
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.