The right figured out years ago that local elections matter as much or more than national ones. We need to come to this same realization right fucking now if we are going to influence the course of our nation.
6 Likes
Preferably not, since for all of his considerable faults Manchin is still much more in line with the Democratic party in general than with the Republicans, plus having him in the seat counts one more D towards control of the Senate.
I mean, Iâm an outsider for whom the US politics is mainly an interesting spectacle (since I canât do anything about it, even if I also suffer from the second-hand effects on the world), so itâs easy for me to be all cold-blooded about Manchin, and support him as the lesser evil. It must be pretty aggravating, having to rely upon him as the last best hope for keeping a WV seat in Democratic hands!
3 Likes
Compromise did not work last time.
WV is my home state and I feel I certain sympathy for them. The level of racism and sexism endemic to the area is largely a result of economic stagnation and a neglected educational system. Having a black man and then a woman as dem nominee has caused an almost psychotic reaction there. Elevating that area out of the 1950s will be a generational effort. Manchin is only there because family is so important and his dad was a political institution forever.
5 Likes
People in some demographics may feel that their vote doesnât count, and no politicians care about them, so why vote?
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Politicians of both parties, or people who work for them, crunch the numbers and pitch their time, effort and message to demographics that do get out and vote.
The best way to have politicians pitching to you in 2020 is to vote in 2018.
3 Likes
1960s all over againâŚ
4 Likes
They sure do. ŽiŞek, for example, says that Clinton would have been worse than Trump, and that professors who are smart enough should be allowed to force their students to sleep with them. Klein wrote extensively on how Chåvez cleverly crafted the Venezualan economy so as to be immune from financial crisis.
Me, I prefer quality to quantity when it comes to words.
Chomsky, incidentally, is on record as supporting voting for candidates you donât like to block worse ones; in an interview just after the election, he said:
âIf you have any moral understanding, you want to keep the greater evil out,â says Chomsky. âI didnât like Clinton at all, but her positions are much better than Trumpâs on every issue I can think of.â
6 Likes
In a two party system thereâs really no other effective choice. Which is why such systems are terrible.
3 Likes
It is more an artifact of first-past-the-post voting than of the party system, but of course all voting systems have their problems.
The number one problem with voting in the US (and I assume everywhere else that voting is still allowed) is the voters.
1 Like
FPTP has the biggest ones though, the lack of representation for those who didnât vote for the winner is alarming.
2 Likes
Yeah, about thatâŚ
âI think itâs worthy of looking at it. I think the president needs to say what he intends to do,â Manchin said during a West Virginia Senate debate.
Manchinâs opponent, Republican Patrick Morrisey, said Trump is âright to look at the birthright lottery,â but added he would want to see the presidentâs executive order to ensure itâs being handled the right way.
6 Likes
It depends on what you want to optimize.
lack of representation for those who didnât vote for the winner is alarming.
In ranked choice methods you could have a winner whom nobody had as their first choice.
Parliamentary systems are arguably worse in this regard, as the only people who get to vote for the winner are other MPs.
Who mentioned the 2 kinds of voters earlier? I scrolled thru again but couldnât find it. Seemed obvious but can you elaborate?
Now youâre comparing a political system with electoral systems, thatâs not the same thing.
1 Like
in the context of the comment by @Papasan , what does that even mean?
4 Likes
I was specifically responding to your âlack of representation for those who didnât vote for the winner is alarmingâ comment. I agree somewhat, but it is a pretty standard characteristic of modern representative democracies.
I wasnât referring to two typed of voters here, but more generally to the combination of (a) US votersâ disinterest in voting altogether, (b) willingness to believe the worst rubbish they see on the media, (c) active antagonism towards anyone with actual expertise, especially if it contradicts some anonymous facts someone tweeted you online, and so on.
I canât imagine interest in voting would increase if voters had to fill out ballots that allowed ranked voting on all offices.
I would say interest would increase with ranked voting, but not nearly as much as simply incentivating voting to begin with (not with penalties ideally, but with access and advertising).
2 Likes
I agree with increasing access, possibly with advertising (though Iâm currently getting several ads every day urging me to go vote), but my worry with ranked voting is that the ballots would be bigger and more complicated. (Especially if we went to Condorcet voting, which rather appeals to me.) If a voter already thinks voting is a hassle, how much more would she think that if it took longer and required more mental effort?
NeedsâŚmoreâŚellipsesâŚ
2 Likes
item 12,347 on my list of examples of the fact that elections have consequencesâ
8 Likes
