Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,179 Year: 5,436/9,624 Month: 461/323 Week: 101/204 Day: 1/16 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The 2016 United States Presidential Election
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 68 of 892 (792929)
10-15-2016 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Diomedes
10-13-2016 9:35 AM


Re: Recent Polls and Election Predictions
Diomedes posits:
Although my instincts tell me that if they the Republicans do lose the senate, they will use their lame duck time frame to rush Garland's nomination through the process.
Couldn't Obama simply withdraw the nomination November 9th???
"You had your chance, suckers..."

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Diomedes, posted 10-13-2016 9:35 AM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by jar, posted 10-15-2016 5:29 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied
 Message 70 by Diomedes, posted 10-15-2016 5:41 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 110 of 892 (793089)
10-20-2016 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Taq
10-19-2016 3:17 PM


Re: Rigged
Taq writes, regarding the election process:
It takes the same amount of time every other year--just one day, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
Not TRUE, mon ami. My friend in Wisconsin will vote Oct. 22nd. I also know of someone in Georgia who as already voted.
Then there is absentee voting, where ballots can come in after November 8th this year and be counted if they were post-marked in time. Mail in voting in Oregon & Washington are two more examples.
Plus the Primary Season is VERY MUCH a part of the election process.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Taq, posted 10-19-2016 3:17 PM Taq has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 111 of 892 (793090)
10-20-2016 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Taq
10-12-2016 6:05 PM


Gerrymandering solution?
Taq writes way back on the 12th:
And let's not forget gerrymandering. Another tactic they used, especially in 2010 when the Congressional districts were re-drawn.
In case it wasn't clear, that is what I meant by "their control of congressional districting through state governments" in the previous post.
This may belong in a new thread, but I just wanted to toss out this idea to eliminate gerrymandering completely:
Suppose we have a state with 16 districts, like Ohio.
How do we avoid gerrymandering of any kind?
Part 1
--------------
Suppose every seat is At Large. The General Election ballot will have maybe 40-50 candidates on it, with a letter beside, indicating party affiliation - R, D, L, I, G, and so on.
In 2014 the Ohio popular vote split like this:
R 51.2%
D 45.5
L 1.2
I 0.8
G 0.3
and so on.
Apportion the 16 Representatives accordingly:
16 * .512 = 8.19
16 * .455 = 7.28
16 * .012 = 0.19
16 * .008 = 0.13
16 * .003 = 0.05
and so on.
So the Republicans get 8 representives, the Democrats 7 and the Libertarians get 1, the rest not getting enough.
Part 2
-------------
The highest 8 R finishers are in.
The highest 7 D finishers are in.
The highest L finisher is in.
Just as a note, Ohio is currently split 12 R and 4 D, which is EVIDENCE of R gerrymandering. By having ALL candidates running at large there are NO district lines to gerrymander.
What do you think? There must be something wrong with this idea. Right?
Help me out?
Edited by xongsmith, : general election (i.e. November 8th this year)
Edited by xongsmith, : this

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Taq, posted 10-12-2016 6:05 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by kjsimons, posted 10-20-2016 4:07 PM xongsmith has replied
 Message 113 by Taq, posted 10-20-2016 5:22 PM xongsmith has replied
 Message 136 by nwr, posted 10-23-2016 11:06 AM xongsmith has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 114 of 892 (793094)
10-20-2016 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by kjsimons
10-20-2016 4:07 PM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
kjsimons asks:
Representatives currently represent a geographic area, like a city or county. In many states there are rural and urban areas with different issues and wants due to this. How do you decide which representative represents your city or county under your plan?
You don't. You decide which Representative candidate represents yourself the most, not what is best for where you live. You could live in the sticks of a rural farmland which will always vote redneck in overwhelming numbers, but align to a candidate in the inner city that is closer to your positions. Currently you are screwed by living where you live. I suppose you could decide to move into the inner city district where candidates align with you. Or vice versa - you could be stuck in the city but want to vote for Old McDonald on his farm and be unable to move out to the country. But why deal with that if it isn't necessary?
It would a be paradigm shift and might take a few 2-year cycles to shake out.
Edited by xongsmith, : added missing s on represents

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by kjsimons, posted 10-20-2016 4:07 PM kjsimons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by kjsimons, posted 10-20-2016 10:02 PM xongsmith has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 115 of 892 (793095)
10-20-2016 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Taq
10-20-2016 5:22 PM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
Taq writes:
I personally think it is worth preserving the tradition of US Representatives being held accountable to an actual geographic region and the voters who live in that geographic region.
Why?
Isn't this just another fossil of the days of property owners being the only people allowed to vote?
The down-river voters in the district below may not want a nuclear power plant upstream. Or a coal-fired power plant upwind.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Taq, posted 10-20-2016 5:22 PM Taq has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 120 of 892 (793135)
10-21-2016 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by kjsimons
10-20-2016 10:02 PM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
kjsimons writes:
I don't think you have really thought this through. Let's say you live in Austin, Texas, a totally blue city. A local blue representative could actually help you if the area wasn't gerrymandered so that there is no blue majority districts. What you suggest would allow the tyranny of the majority to continue to overrun the minority as there would be no local Representative for the area.
Glad you brought up Texas. Lets see what my plan would have produced:
Texas in 2014: 36 districts
Part 1
--------------
In 2014 the Texas popular vote split like this:
R 60.28%
D 33.10
L 5.06
G 1.39
I 0.18
Apportion the 36 Representatives accordingly:
R 36 * .6028 = 21.70
D 36 * .3310 = 11.92
L 36 * .0506 = 1.82
G 36 * .0139 = 0.50
I 36 * .0018 = 0.06
-------------------
36.00
So the Republicans get 22 representives, the Democrats 12 and the Libertarians get 2, the rest not getting enough.
Part 2
-------------
The highest 22 R finishers are in.
The highest 12 D finishers are in.
The highest 2 L finishers are in.
Just as a note, Texas is currently split 25 R and 11 D, which is EVIDENCE of R gerrymandering.
Are you going to tell me that none of the 12 Highest D finishers might come from Austin?
Also notice that a 3rd party got 2 Representatives!!

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by kjsimons, posted 10-20-2016 10:02 PM kjsimons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by xongsmith, posted 10-21-2016 3:29 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 122 of 892 (793137)
10-21-2016 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by xongsmith
10-21-2016 3:15 PM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
Let's look at the 1st district results:
Texas's 1st Congressional District, 2014[4] Party Candidate Votes %
Republican Louie Gohmert (Incumbent) 115,084 77.47%
Democratic Shirley McKellar 33,476 22.53%
Total votes 148,560 100%
In the current system all 33,476 votes for Shirley McKellar are thrown away.
In my system, the 33,476 are added to the D state-wide totals to help increase the apportioned Democratic share of the 36 Representatives. Now it may be true that McKellar may not have finished in the top 12 Democrats, but her votes still have contributed to the D share in congress. They are not wasted in her heavily R district anymore. 22.53% is better than none at all.
Edited by xongsmith, : percentage signs

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by xongsmith, posted 10-21-2016 3:15 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by NoNukes, posted 10-21-2016 5:00 PM xongsmith has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 126 of 892 (793141)
10-21-2016 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by NoNukes
10-21-2016 4:39 PM


Re: Unscientific exit poll...
How is it that you are able to go to different polling places? I have only the Ward 4A place in town where my name is on their list. I have to go there to vote....
Strange.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by NoNukes, posted 10-21-2016 4:39 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by kjsimons, posted 10-21-2016 5:23 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 128 of 892 (793143)
10-21-2016 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by NoNukes
10-21-2016 5:00 PM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
NoNukes also misses the paradigm shift:
What you are essentially saying is that you want all of the representatives to be elected "at large" regardless of what area of the state they represent.
The Representatives should represent what YOU want, not some area of the state. You are essentially arguing for Government by the land owners.
While this might sound like a great idea, there are some huge downsides. For example, your representative might end up being someone who has no knowledge of or strong ties to your area of the state despite the fact that the issues involved in your say urban area are distinct from large but sparse rural area of the state.
"Your representative"??? My Representatives (note the plural) are all from my party, all over the state, as a TEAM. You are still thinking of where I particularly live within Texas (or whatever). If my party's 12 guys can't address my concerns, then I will campaign within my party for those that do next time. Or switch parties, if it comes to that.
So a few of my 12 Democrats in Texas might have no idea of my "urban" concerns? Certainly the 22 Republicans wont either. Neither will the 2 Libertarians. The point is to get a fair representation. My 12 guys WILL be better for my concerns than a gerrymandered 8-10 guys, true? Remember which party started "gerrymandering". Who's to say, years from now, as long as they draw lines, which "neutral" agency will be fair?
A better system would be just not to allow political gerrymandering which in many cases ends up being predominately race based discrimination excuses as "just politics". NC is a primary example of the downside of the current system.
True, but so open to betrayal later, by bribes and other corruptible forces. You have to get rid of the concept of "districts". Whenever you draw lines, you have a monster of a job making sure there are no discriminating lines. Think of the money this would save. How do you define "no political gerrymandering"? How do others? Who is right?
Consider the 33,476 D votes for the loser in the 2014 Texas 1st District race. In today's system these are all wasted votes. In my system they all go into the accumulation of D votes which helps towards the D Representation tally that will apportion out the 36 Representatives accordingly*. People won't stay at home so much anymore, thinking their vote won't count. Also the population discrepancies of each district, which leads some to having more power in their vote as opposed to other districts, is nullified. It isn't land, it's the people remember?
Remember, when you take the ballot and go into the booth, there will be maybe some 80-160 qualified names listed, clearly labelled by party, and you can vote for no more than 36, for Texas in 2014. Today you can only vote for a name in your district. Often some asshole is running unopposed. Well, you won't have to skip that part or write in Mickey Mouse there any more.
Paradigm shift.
* of course the nearest integer algorithm will be needed.
Edited by xongsmith, : is/are
Edited by xongsmith, : more tidying ups
Edited by xongsmith, : No reason given.
Edited by xongsmith, : Forget the 2 Libertarians
Edited by xongsmith, : more detail
Edited by xongsmith, : asshole fix

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by NoNukes, posted 10-21-2016 5:00 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by NoNukes, posted 10-22-2016 1:31 AM xongsmith has not replied
 Message 132 by ringo, posted 10-22-2016 11:53 AM xongsmith has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 133 of 892 (793171)
10-22-2016 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by ringo
10-22-2016 11:53 AM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
ringo responds:
No. Government by the residents. Didn't Thomas Paine say something to the effect that people on this side of the ocean are better able to manage their own affairs than some goober on the other side of the ocean?
We're talking within one state, not the other side of the ocean. You are using hyperbole beyond it being useful.
MY representatives, both at the provincial and federal level, are from a party that I wouldn't vote for if I live to be a million. But they're still MY representatives. They have a duty to represent me whether I voted for them or not. I'd rather be represented by my neighbour, regardless of our political differences, than by somebody a thousand miles away who happens to agree with my opinions.
What USA state is 1000 miles across? Possibly Alaska. As for the duty to represent you, who really does that these days? If you'd rather be represented by your neighbour instead of a politician who aligns with your views, then VOTE FOR YOUR NEIGHBOUR. It's really that simple. But if I have NO NEIGHBOUR I LIKE, and I live in Texas' 1st District, why shouldn't I be able to vote for VaLinda Hathcox who was redistricted to District 4, next to District 1, instead of Shirley McKellar - Shirley may stand for something I don't want.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by ringo, posted 10-22-2016 11:53 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by NoNukes, posted 10-23-2016 1:24 AM xongsmith has replied
 Message 139 by ringo, posted 10-23-2016 2:19 PM xongsmith has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 141 of 892 (793191)
10-23-2016 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by NoNukes
10-23-2016 1:24 AM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
NoNukes writes:
The concerns that get people elected in Richmond, VA are vastly different than those that get folks elected in Woodbridge VA, a town which is pretty much a DC suburb. You don't need a thousand mile wide state before regional concerns become important.
Then enough people who share the concerns of Richmond, VA will elect a Rep who shares their concerns. The Rep will get enough votes to fall into the top N needed to make it.
You don't have to live in Richmond to vote for someone who shares your concerns there. You could actually live in Woodbridge.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by NoNukes, posted 10-23-2016 1:24 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by NoNukes, posted 10-23-2016 4:59 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


Message 142 of 892 (793192)
10-23-2016 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by ringo
10-23-2016 2:19 PM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
ringo asks:
Why stop at state lines? Why shouldn't you be able to vote for somebody in Hawaii who agrees with you?
Indeed! If the Hawaiian gets enough votes to fall into the top N needed....
There may be an issue within the US Constitution, however...i dunno.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by ringo, posted 10-23-2016 2:19 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by ringo, posted 10-23-2016 3:43 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


(1)
Message 163 of 892 (793246)
10-24-2016 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by Percy
10-24-2016 9:15 AM


Re: Gerrymandering solution?
Percy writes:
It means I must make the choice that makes it least likely that Trump will win, which here in New Hampshire means voting for Hillary Clinton.
and give her a Senate too! In New Hampshire you can vote for Maggie Hassan down ticket.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Percy, posted 10-24-2016 9:15 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


(2)
Message 239 of 892 (793588)
11-02-2016 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by RAZD
11-02-2016 9:53 AM


Re: because ... hacking
RAZD writes:
The obvious solution is to insist on a paper trail that can be (a) verified and (b) recounted by independent vote auditors.
...and get a receipt of your own ballot (like a carbon copy) with your same ballot's long serial number you take home. Ballots are serial-numbered randomly. Later you can look up on the website and see how they counted the ballot with your serial number, which no one but you, yourself, knows.
This could also help understand how your IRV ballot wound up being counted. I seem to recall that Lani Guinier of the Clinton Administration wanted the IRV system.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by RAZD, posted 11-02-2016 9:53 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by nwr, posted 11-03-2016 11:58 AM xongsmith has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009


(1)
Message 241 of 892 (793594)
11-02-2016 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by RAZD
10-29-2016 8:58 AM


Re: gerrymandering again
RAZD writes:
Every state that has gerrymandered districts is using their power to stay in power, which is basically what this kind of rigging is all about.
So Massachusetts would be an example for you.
Indeed, look at this:
There are 2 mathematical concepts that may come into play here - 1. fence efficiency, which is the area divided by the square of the perimeter length - and 2. convex hull, which is the smallest polygon that encloses the area, being able to connect, with a straight line, any 2 points in the polygon without leaving the polygon.
Clearly these are not the case above, but there are difficulties in holding to 1 and 2. They should only be a guideline. Look at the boundary of District 8, perhaps the most egregious.
Edited by xongsmith, : swap FE math around to make efficiency measure higher for better fences
Edited by xongsmith, : straight lines!

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by RAZD, posted 10-29-2016 8:58 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by AZPaul3, posted 11-02-2016 2:40 PM xongsmith has replied
 Message 246 by xongsmith, posted 11-02-2016 2:45 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024