Comments for Kat Swift for President http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog A Swift change for a Green future Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:57:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 Comment on “American society creates both offenders & victims.” by Kat http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=8#comment-715 Kat Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:32:44 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=8#comment-715 people who contradict my belief that adults don't care about the well-being of children. people who contradict my belief that adults don’t care about the well-being of children.

]]> Comment on “American society creates both offenders & victims.” by Chris http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=8#comment-404 Chris Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:28:49 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=8#comment-404 People that contradict what beliefs? People that contradict what beliefs?

]]> Comment on “Anchor babies?” by chris http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=39#comment-393 chris Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:15:48 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=39#comment-393 "It does bring up a question I am going to ask a far-right conservative at some point. If they believe that the “unborn” have the same rights as all Americans, and that “life begins at conception”, how will they word the law, amendment, or court decision? If an “unborn child” is conceived in the US, and 9 months later born in the US, does he/she not have the same rights as all other Americans???" I suggest anyone reading this visit l4l.org and stop stereotyping people. “It does bring up a question I am going to ask a far-right conservative at some point. If they believe that the “unborn” have the same rights as all Americans, and that “life begins at conception”, how will they word the law, amendment, or court decision? If an “unborn child” is conceived in the US, and 9 months later born in the US, does he/she not have the same rights as all other Americans???”

I suggest anyone reading this visit l4l.org and stop stereotyping people.

]]> Comment on forget the laws, build a wall by chris http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=74#comment-392 chris Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:04:52 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=74#comment-392 You assume all Germans are evil. You assume all Germans are evil.

]]> Comment on Green Party’s wonder woman by LarryK12308 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=71#comment-330 LarryK12308 Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:00:25 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=71#comment-330 Forget about Obama/Clinton My dream team is Swift/McKinney Either one at the top is fine with me! Forget about Obama/Clinton

My dream team is Swift/McKinney

Either one at the top is fine with me!

]]> Comment on forget the laws, build a wall by moondog http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=74#comment-327 moondog Fri, 06 Jun 2008 02:30:19 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=74#comment-327 i met a guy in racine, wisconsin who was a WWII veteran. he told me that he was stationed in texas during the war and actually caught a few germans a week trying to sneak across the border into the country. granted, we are not technically at war with terroristan or whatever country these terrorists happen to be from this week. but it does happen. the wall is still a giant waste of money but at least *some* of the rhetoric has some basis in reality. i met a guy in racine, wisconsin who was a WWII veteran. he told me that he was stationed in texas during the war and actually caught a few germans a week trying to sneak across the border into the country. granted, we are not technically at war with terroristan or whatever country these terrorists happen to be from this week. but it does happen. the wall is still a giant waste of money but at least *some* of the rhetoric has some basis in reality.

]]> Comment on Range Voting vs IRV by Greg http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-326 Greg Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:04:49 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-326 Purple Ninja Grrl, your example shows how Range can keep the "spoiler" effect in place. Had Swift not been in the race, then "Person 1" would have surely given Obama 100% and "Person 2" would have probably as well, because Obama is the favorite candidate of both in the absence of Swift. So Swift's entry into the race does in fact hurt Obama's chances. Thus, you should expect Swift to still be derided as a "spoiler" and kept out of the debates. With IRV, Swift plays no "spoiler" role whatsoever, thus increasingly her chances to participate in debates and to have a meaningful impact on the election. Purple Ninja Grrl, your example shows how Range can keep the “spoiler” effect in place. Had Swift not been in the race, then “Person 1″ would have surely given Obama 100% and “Person 2″ would have probably as well, because Obama is the favorite candidate of both in the absence of Swift. So Swift’s entry into the race does in fact hurt Obama’s chances. Thus, you should expect Swift to still be derided as a “spoiler” and kept out of the debates. With IRV, Swift plays no “spoiler” role whatsoever, thus increasingly her chances to participate in debates and to have a meaningful impact on the election.

]]> Comment on Range Voting vs IRV by Purple Ninja Grrl http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-278 Purple Ninja Grrl Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:19:27 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-278 I've been a long-time supporter of Range voting and in my opinion its strengths over IRV are not the mathematical nit-picks over unusual-case scenarios, but rather (a) This is the MOST important advantage -- aside from ripping your ballot in half, there's pretty much no way to cast an uncountable vote using range. With IRV (and with other ranked-preference methods), say, you absent-mindedly mark two second-choice candidates on the same race? Hey, guess what, your ballot isn't worth squat anymore. (b) It's more expressive. Take the following two range ballots: Person 1: Swift 100%, Obama 90%, McCain 0% Person 2: Swift 100%, Obama 10%, McCain 0% Despite having radically different opinions about the middle candidate, both of these would cast a ballot with Swift 1 / Obama 2 / McCain 3 under IRV. I know I'm just kinda being an echo here, but in my mind these two points are what won me over for RV over IRV. In reality though I'd accept either one as a vast improvement over the nonsense we have to deal with now. As for this specific ballot initiative, although I do like point #1, I'd rather see something closer to at-large elections that proportionally appoint winners based on highest-utility methods... that could do away with the need for districts entirely and thus prevent gerrymandering... however most of those methods I speak of are either insanely computationally intensive or potentially inaccurate approximations... perhaps for the time being their proposal is better? I’ve been a long-time supporter of Range voting and in my opinion its strengths over IRV are not the mathematical nit-picks over unusual-case scenarios, but rather

(a) This is the MOST important advantage — aside from ripping your ballot in half, there’s pretty much no way to cast an uncountable vote using range. With IRV (and with other ranked-preference methods), say, you absent-mindedly mark two second-choice candidates on the same race? Hey, guess what, your ballot isn’t worth squat anymore.

(b) It’s more expressive. Take the following two range ballots:

Person 1: Swift 100%, Obama 90%, McCain 0%
Person 2: Swift 100%, Obama 10%, McCain 0%

Despite having radically different opinions about the middle candidate, both of these would cast a ballot with Swift 1 / Obama 2 / McCain 3 under IRV.

I know I’m just kinda being an echo here, but in my mind these two points are what won me over for RV over IRV. In reality though I’d accept either one as a vast improvement over the nonsense we have to deal with now.

As for this specific ballot initiative, although I do like point #1, I’d rather see something closer to at-large elections that proportionally appoint winners based on highest-utility methods… that could do away with the need for districts entirely and thus prevent gerrymandering… however most of those methods I speak of are either insanely computationally intensive or potentially inaccurate approximations… perhaps for the time being their proposal is better?

]]> Comment on Range Voting vs IRV by Greg http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-71 Greg Sat, 31 May 2008 21:55:10 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-71 Kat, the Ballot Initiative is largely well-done, with the exception of the Range Voting item. For starters, Range Voting isn’t used to elect any public office anywhere in the world, so we have very little understanding of how it might work in practice. Do you really want to promote the national adoption of a system that is so untested in public elections? Your discussion of clones misses one of the biggest problems with Range Voting. Consider the case where you have two similar candidates A1 and A2, and a very different candidate B. If I prefer A1 slightly better than A2 but a lot better than B, then I have a dilemma. I can maximize the chance B loses by giving both A1 and A2 the top score; or I could score A1 higher than A2 but thereby increase the chance B ultimately wins. This problem was coined the “Burr dilemma” by Professor Jack Nagel, and was the key reason he abandoned Approval/Range voting in favor of preferential systems like IRV. IRV does not suffer from this strategic dilemma. Unlike the author of the Range Voting website, Nagel has published, peer-reviewed papers on social choice theory. The claims of the Range Voting advocates are too many and varied to discuss individually here. But every “flaw” I’ve seen them point out has either something that is vanishingly rare in practice or a philosophical difference, not a flaw. No voting system is perfect, of course, but IRV’s weaknesses are fortunately very few and far between. Instead of working out hypothetical scenarios on scratch paper, let’s look at how IRV was worked in practice in the US and across the world. These supposed problems with IRV are just non-issues in practice. It gives third parties a more meaningful way to participate in elections, without derided as “spoilers”, and it helps pave the way for proportional representation with Choice Voting (STV). Kat, the Ballot Initiative is largely well-done, with the exception of the Range Voting item. For starters, Range Voting isn’t used to elect any public office anywhere in the world, so we have very little understanding of how it might work in practice. Do you really want to promote the national adoption of a system that is so untested in public elections?

Your discussion of clones misses one of the biggest problems with Range Voting. Consider the case where you have two similar candidates A1 and A2, and a very different candidate B. If I prefer A1 slightly better than A2 but a lot better than B, then I have a dilemma. I can maximize the chance B loses by giving both A1 and A2 the top score; or I could score A1 higher than A2 but thereby increase the chance B ultimately wins.

This problem was coined the “Burr dilemma” by Professor Jack Nagel, and was the key reason he abandoned Approval/Range voting in favor of preferential systems like IRV. IRV does not suffer from this strategic dilemma. Unlike the author of the Range Voting website, Nagel has published, peer-reviewed papers on social choice theory.

The claims of the Range Voting advocates are too many and varied to discuss individually here. But every “flaw” I’ve seen them point out has either something that is vanishingly rare in practice or a philosophical difference, not a flaw. No voting system is perfect, of course, but IRV’s weaknesses are fortunately very few and far between.

Instead of working out hypothetical scenarios on scratch paper, let’s look at how IRV was worked in practice in the US and across the world. These supposed problems with IRV are just non-issues in practice. It gives third parties a more meaningful way to participate in elections, without derided as “spoilers”, and it helps pave the way for proportional representation with Choice Voting (STV).

]]> Comment on Range Voting vs IRV by Anthony Lorenzo http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-70 Anthony Lorenzo Sat, 31 May 2008 20:25:34 +0000 http://www.friscodelrosario.net/blog/?p=70#comment-70 Kat: Give me a call and i will explain this fully in detail to you. Email me your number or email me and i will give it to you. Anthony Lorenzo GP member from FL Kat:

Give me a call and i will explain this fully in detail to you. Email me your number or email me and i will give it to you.

Anthony Lorenzo
GP member from FL

]]>