• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 4th, 2024

help-circle
  • Simple question, where are the Whigs today? Gone? Because that’s what it takes to have a different party. The Whigs imploded, and the Democratic Republicans then swept the elections for a couple of years until the Republican Party coalesced.


    Gore did not in fact win. Not because he didn’t have more votes, but because it was close enough that Republicans could steal the election. I Ralph Nader had not been on the ballot, Gore would have easily pulled the win. But several thousand unimpeachable votes.

    This is called the Spoiler Effect. It’s the mechanism by with Durverger’s Law works. A vote for a third party is a vote against your own interests. Ralph Nader voters were horrified to learn that they helped Bush win the election.

    But all this debate here is effectively in a vacuum. We’re not actually talking about the current election. A vote for a socialist third party in this year’s election is a wasted vote. Full Stop. You’ll not impress anyone, and the socialist candidate will not care about you. And that’s because the “socialist” candidate is likely a Republican plant. Because the two major parties know about the Spoiler Effect, and Republicans specifically have been funding the “left leaning” third parties to split the vote so that they can win.

    If you as an individual want to harm yourself, I’ll not really care. I can’t stop you. But if you start advocating for others to join you, I’ll call you out as a Republican plant, working to fuck over the rest of us.


  • Just because you’re too lazy to actually look them up, doesn’t mean that they aren’t full of equations.

    This is one Proof of Arrow’s Theorem;

    Let G be a coalition with size ≥ 2. Partition the coalition into nonempty subsets G 1 , G 2.

    Fix distinct x , y , z. Design the following voting pattern (notice that it is the cyclic voting pattern which causes the Condorcet paradox):

    voters in G 1 : x ≻ i y ≻ i z voters in G 2 : z ≻ i x ≻ i y voters outside G : y ≻ i z ≻ i x

    (Items other than x , y , z are not relevant.)

    Since G is decisive, we have x ≻ y. So at least one is true: x ≻ z or z ≻ y.

    If x ≻ z, then G 1 is weakly decisive over ( x , z ) . If z ≻ y, then G 2 is weakly decisive over ( z , y ). Now apply the field expansion lemma.

    See how helpful that is? No, Well, if you had a phd in math or political science it would be.

    This is the wiki link if you want the full Proofs. And that’s just Arrow’s Theorem.

    Durverger’s Law is both simpler, and more targeted. It simply states that if you have a system of government where there is single winner elections and plurality voting, you will inevitable have a two party system, and that further, any attempt to create a viable Third Party is not only doomed to failure, but is actively harmful to the interests of those Third Party voters.

    In other words, the Spoiler Effect, Like what happened with Ralph Nader in 2000. He’s the reason why Bush won.








  • Edge cases like you describe are a key part of Ordinal voting systems, Cardinal voting systems are immune to that sort of thing.

    Also, Cardinal voting systems can be super easy. Take Approval.

    Simply take a list of names, and mark next to each candidate you approve of. If you feel like you need to have a moral conundrum over what you feel like approval means, then go ahead, but just mark the next to any or all of the names on the list that you like.

    After that, the counting is simple as well. You add up the approval of each candidate, independent of what any other candidate gets, and then the winner is the one with the most approval.

    It is literally impossible to elect an unpopular candidate via Approval, unless only unpopular candidates run.

    STAR is slightly more complex, in that you rate each candidate on a scale of 0-5. Again, no one actually cares about your personal journey in rating someone a 4 or whatnot, just do it and move on.

    Then when counting, you again add up the numbers, take the highest two, and see where they rate on each individual ballot. If one is rated higher than the other, they get the vote from that ballot.




  • That’s some blatant Russian propaganda there. Blame NATO twice for Russian imperialism.

    The “Russia had to invade a sovereign nation because they were talking about joining NATO to prevent Russia from invading them” logic has some holes to it.

    The fact that Russia has invaded their neighbors 14 times since the end of the cold war tells you why one of their neighbors would want to join NATO.

    Also, remember that time that Russia shot down a commercial airliner? The Ukrainians sure as hell do. That was the true beginning of the invasion, which is why Ukraine was in talks to join NATO.


    And yes, people have the right to defend themselves. But the Israeli government has locked down the anti-terror propaganda, because Hamas is pretty vile as far as organizations go. It’s why Israel let Hamas grow and become powerful, and why the Israelis paid to keep Hamas in power for the last decade or so.

    As long as Israel can point at Hamas, they have just enough of an excuse to claim their ethnic cleansing is actually just an anti-terror campaign.

    Hamas is a full on terrorist organization, not that all terrorist organizations are bad. Or rather, there are some causes where a terrorist organization is the appropriate response. John Brown tried it. So did Nelson Mandela. But Hamas is a religious extremist terrorist organization. One that has distasteful views, and was sort of put in place by Israel for those views.

    You see what I’m getting at here? Hamas is fucking evil, and Israel has mostly succeeded in making Hamas the face of Palestinian resistance against Israel.

    I doubt many of the original leaders of Hamas are still alive, but that doesn’t matter either when Israel can just lie and say that whoever they kill is Hamas. It’s a bit maddening, and I doubt there’s an answer to it all except for the other Palestinian resistance groups to step up their social media game.



  • Everyone knows Putin invaded Ukraine because he’s a dumbass dictator who started to believe his own propaganda. It’s the dictator trap. Putin surrounded himself with backstabbing yes men by literally killing anyone who wasn’t.

    As to Palestinian resistance. I don’t think Hamas is a good resistance movement. For a whole host of reasons. Which is why the Israeli government has been propping them up since the 80s.

    An unsympathetic resistance movement can do more to damage a cause than not having a movement at all.

    From now until the ethnic cleansing is complete, Israel will call any resistance movement Hamas, regardless of their actual name or beliefs. I’m not sure how to fight that… I don’t think anyone really knows beyond screaming the truth everywhere we can.

    It didn’t work in the 1920s in Europe. But maybe with the Internet… Likely not though.


  • I’ll add in, Ranked Choice is a bad choice. The “edge cases” mentioned in the post can happen in any and every election using the system.

    If Ranked Choice were the only option besides what we have, it would be a slight improvement, but there are far better options.

    STAR is simple, and does everything that RCV claims to do, but actually fails to do.

    Something to keep in mind for the push to reform voting laws after this election.