Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   StillIRise1963 (stillirise1963@mastodon.world)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 00:01:05 JST StillIRise1963

   22% of Black people are NOT voting for Trump. Only a fucking white person would say some shit like that with a straight face.🙄

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 00:01:02 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG @StillIRise1963
     This is the correct conclusion, but it’s going to take a lot of my fellow white people a whole lot of working through feelings to get there. Folks still have this foolish idea that voting is like picking a fashion style or a sports team, an identity statement that’s supposed to make you feel good.

   • Embed this notice
     starkrg@myside-yourside.net's status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 00:01:03 JST StarkRG

     in reply to

     @StillIRise1963 I *really* don't want to vote for Biden, the bar was extremely low and he's still managed to disappoint, but I'm gonna do it anyway because Trump is *so* much worse. It's not even a contest.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:02:55 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG @StillIRise1963
     I’m very much a fan voting systems that us rankings, although when people say “Ranked Choice,” they’re usually talking about Instant Runoff, which is a •terrible• system, almost as bad as plurality. Sort of the natural gas of voting systems: better than coal, but….

     I’m hoping that IRV opens the door to better systems range Approval Voting, Range Voting, Star Voting, etc. But progress is progress, and I’ll take it.

   • Embed this notice
     starkrg@myside-yourside.net's status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:02:57 JST StarkRG

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell

     @inthehands @StillIRise1963 It's by no means a cure-all, but two things that desperately need to be implemented in the US are ranked choice voting (strategic voting wouldn't be a thing anymore, if the person you most want to win doesn't, your vote goes to your next choice), and compulsory voting (voting isn't a privilege, it's a duty like jury duty, a necessary part of being a citizen).

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:11:24 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG
     It’s not that good either. It’s •extremely• vulnerable to strategic nomination (especially but not limited to candidate cloning), and in the presence of such strategy, strategic voting becomes just necessary as with Plurality but even more confusing. It’s not a system that holds up well under careful analysis.

   • Embed this notice
     starkrg@myside-yourside.net's status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:11:26 JST StarkRG

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell

     @inthehands Instant runoff/single transferable vote isn't that bad. It still eliminates the need for strategic voting and tells the more powerful parties that they aren't as highly prized as they think. Theoretically, they'll be more likely to take advice from third parties that received a high number of high ranked votes, though I don't think this happens.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:20:44 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG
     Sorry, I misremembered! First: “Candidate cloning” means nominating extra candidates very similar to the one you hope to defeat. That’s not quite the thing IRV is vulnerable to; additional near-identical candidates don’t hurt each other. IRV is vulnerable to a different kind of spoiler effect: having more •different• fringe candidates can eliminate consensus choices. Asking forgiveness for the long reply, here’s an extreme illustration:

   • Embed this notice
     starkrg@myside-yourside.net's status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:20:46 JST StarkRG

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell

     @inthehands Candidate cloning?

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:24:36 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG
     Suppose a state is heavily politically divided, diff regions hate each other. The most populous region wants a governor who will screw over the rest of the state. They field such a candidate, and •also• field candidates making the same “screw over the rest of the state” promise in every •other• region. That’s strategic nomination.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:26:13 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG
     The “share everything fairly” candidates are many people’s second and third choices, but few people’s first choices, so they’re eliminated in early rounds of IRV. At that point, only the “screw the other regions!” candidates are left, so the one for the most populous region winds.

     IRV can eliminate consensus choices in favor of extremists. My example is extreme, but this effect can play out IRL with as few as 3 candidates. Just harder to see.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:30:59 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG
     This page includes a real-life example of this effect from Burlington, VT: https://electionscience.org/library/the-spoiler-effect/

     It’s a little harder to get your head around, because it’s not constructed to be obviously preposterous like my example. But it’s the same principle in action.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:45:12 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • StarkRG

     @StarkRG
     Yes, it’s an improvement. I’m just frustrated that we finally have an alternate vote-counting system gaining traction, and somehow we managed to make it the second-worst one! Mathematicians and political scientists have devoted a lot of energy to thinking about this, and we’re not doing a great job of listening.

   • Embed this notice
     starkrg@myside-yourside.net's status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2023 01:45:13 JST StarkRG

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell

     @inthehands I see. Yes, Instant runoff isn't the best, but I definitely wouldn't say it's terrible. It's certainly significantly better than plurality voting.