Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [RangeVoting] Re: The Occupy Movement: A Ray of Hope

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Unger
    John, I took a quick look at your website and it looks interesting. I will get into it more in a few days. Steve ............
    Message 1 of 11 , Dec 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      John,

      I took a quick look at your website and it looks interesting. I will get
      into it more in a few days.

      Steve
      ............

      On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, John Lawrence wrote:

      > Right on, Steve. It's about time that the people who are being screwed by the current regime stand up and make their voices heard. Students are being led down the primrose path that a college degree is the ticket of admission to the American dream when in reality they are graduating with huge amounts of student loan debt and no job offers. When I attended University of California in the 1960s, there was no - zero - tuition. Now it's increasing by leaps and bounds.
      >
      > OWS must of necessity be a student led movement. They must join with the homeless who have been occupying the streets for some time now and are being joined by former middle classers every day. The foreclosure crisis is not resolved, and American jobs are in short supply. Meanwhile, bankers and hedge fund managers rack up billions in profits.
      >
      > Inequality has never been greater in the US. Congress persons are enriching themselves with insider trading - perfectly legal for them. Illegal for everyone else. The American military-industrial complex is the employer of last resort. Cutting it would increase joblessness even more so we are stuck in an empire committed to war to maintain what meager employment base we have.
      >
      > Infrastructure is third world quality because the rich provide their own private infrastructure. Downtown main libraries go unfunded because they are mainly hangouts for the homeless.
      >
      > As a former engineer, I'm now committed to economic democracy. See my writings here - http://www.socialchoiceandbeyond.com and http://willblogforfood.typepad.com
      >
      >
      > --- In RangeVoting@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Unger <unger@...> wrote:
      >>
      >> It looks as tho, after a long slumber, the sleeping giant, American
      >> democracy, has suddenly awakened. A broad spectrum of Americans,
      >> recognizing how the country has been captured by the corporate elite,
      >> is effectively shouting, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to
      >> take this anymore!" Beginning with a few hundred, mostly young, people
      >> taking over a small park near the Wall Street stock exchange, a
      >> growing movement appears to be gaining momentum. This despite efforts
      >> by a number of city governments, led by New York Mayor Bloomberg, to
      >> shut it down thru the use of police equipped for combat with
      >> paratroopers. It seems clear that the Occupy movement is not going to
      >> fade away.
      >>
      >> My thoughts on the topic are accessible at:
      >> http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~unger/myBlog/endsandmeansblog.html
      >>
      >> Steve
      >> ............
      >>
      >> Stephen H. Unger
      >> Professor Emeritus
      >> Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
      >> Columbia University
      >> ............
      >>
      >
      >
      >
    • Lou Pellathy
      How about a third party based on a scientific survey of the issues? http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been
      Message 2 of 11 , Dec 2, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        How about a third party based on a scientific survey of the issues? http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com/

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Dale Sheldon-Hess
        Any centrist/moderate/consensus party is pretty much doomed by Duverger s law and lesser-evilism. Election reform almost has to come first. -- Dale
        Message 3 of 11 , Dec 2, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Any centrist/moderate/consensus party is pretty much doomed by Duverger's
          law and lesser-evilism.

          Election reform almost has to come first.

          --
          Dale Sheldon-Hess

          On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Lou Pellathy <thenewthirdparty@...>wrote:

          > **
          >
          >
          > How about a third party based on a scientific survey of the issues?
          > http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com/
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • WarrenS
          ... --that would be nice. However, a USA third party will never get anywhere until voting system changes. The more appealing and good said party is, the more
          Message 4 of 11 , Dec 3, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            > How about a third party based on a scientific survey of the issues? http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com/


            --that would be nice. However, a USA third party will never get anywhere until voting system changes. The more appealing and good said party is, the more that will hurt us
            in our paradoxical voting system...
          • WarrenS
            ... I should elaborate, since you probably do not appreciate the situation. Poll data shows over 90% of Nader and Buchanan top-preferrers did not vote for
            Message 5 of 11 , Dec 3, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In RangeVoting@yahoogroups.com, "WarrenS" <wds@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > > How about a third party based on a scientific survey of the issues? http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com/
              >
              >
              > --that would be nice. However, a USA third party will never get anywhere until voting system changes. The more appealing and good said party is, the more that will hurt us
              > in our paradoxical voting system...


              I should elaborate, since you probably do not appreciate the situation.

              Poll data shows over 90% of Nader and Buchanan top-preferrers did not
              vote for either in 2000. Indeed, Nader was preferred by a majority
              versus every rival (Bush, Gore, Buchanan) among voters willing to rate both
              on an 0-100 scale, i.e. Nader was an honest-votes Condorcet winner (this is ANES
              nationwide pre-election poll data, about 2000 polled).

              So. I repeat.
              Nader had to overcome 90% of his top-preferrers refusing to vote for him. That is the
              level of distortion plurality voting causes. No candidate, no matter how good, can overcome a 90% desertion rate.

              Your third party will never succeed until the voting system changes.
              It needs to make that its top priority. So far, no US third party has ever made
              voting system reform its top priority. In fact, no US third party has even come
              anywhere near to making it its top priority. Which is why every US third party since
              the 1850s, has always died uselessly without ever being able to win the presidency
              and in the last decade without ever being able to win even a single congressional or senate seat.

              Instant Runoff Voting will not help. Australia has had it for 80+ years and in the last 4 election cycles, 600 IRV seats contested in all, the total number won by a third party was.... 1 seat.
            • Michael Ellis
              ... I d say we re screwed, then, since neither of the majority parties are likely to support any change that might dethrone them and the general public has
              Message 6 of 11 , Dec 4, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM, WarrenS <wds@...> wrote:

                > Your third party will never succeed until the voting system changes.
                > It needs to make that its top priority. So far, no US third party has ever
                > made
                > voting system reform its top priority. In fact, no US third party has even
                > come
                > anywhere near to making it its top priority. Which is why every US third
                > party since
                > the 1850s, has always died uselessly without ever being able to win the
                > presidency
                > and in the last decade without ever being able to win even a single
                > congressional or senate seat.
                >

                I'd say we're screwed, then, since neither of the majority parties are
                likely to support any change that might dethrone them and the general
                public has little comprehension or interest in alternative voting systems.

                We range-voting enthusiasts really need a public success to point at.
                Perhaps the entrepreneurial strategy from Crossing the
                Chasm<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Chasm_(book)> might
                be applicable. The author, Geoffrey Moore, identifies an analogous problem
                that faces most early stage start-ups. The prescription is to identify a
                target market that's small enough to dominate with the resources available.
                Perhaps we should try something similar -- perhaps by identifying one
                municipality or county in the country with a populace and political
                situation that are conducive to giving range voting a fair try -- and
                focusing as much effort as we can muster into getting them to do so. I
                don't have an immediate candidate in mind or even a good idea as to what
                the criteria for selection should be but perhaps some of the more
                politically astute among you can help with that.

                just my $.02
                Mike


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Dave Ketchum
                Your subject contains a word to build on - Occupy . 2012 is a major election year. Occupy members should get in, ready to work for better election methods,
                Message 7 of 11 , Dec 4, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  Your subject contains a word to build on - "Occupy".

                  2012 is a major election year. Occupy members should get in, ready to
                  work for better election methods, but NOT emphasizing any desire to
                  kill the current major parties. Getting good people into major party
                  primaries is worthy, but running as Green or Libertarian is also worthy.

                  A detail from this year's election might help inspire.
                  I am from a Republican county. A supervisor, Darlene, lost to Joe in
                  the Rep primary.

                  Joe, thinking about it, decided he was not ready for the job so, 18
                  days before election day, Bob starts serious campaigning as a
                  replacement. So, we now have election counts (Dems do not try here
                  for many offices):
                  111 Rep - Joe - on the ballot though not campaigning.
                  346 Con - Darlene - running as Con though unable to run as Rep+Con.
                  540 Write-in - Bob - who gets the votes as a write-in with his
                  short campaign.

                  Dave Ketchum

                  On Dec 4, 2011, at 2:13 PM, Michael Ellis wrote:
                  > On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM, WarrenS <wds@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >> Your third party will never succeed until the voting system changes.
                  >> It needs to make that its top priority. So far, no US third party
                  >> has ever
                  >> made
                  >> voting system reform its top priority. In fact, no US third party
                  >> has even
                  >> come
                  >> anywhere near to making it its top priority. Which is why every US
                  >> third
                  >> party since
                  >> the 1850s, has always died uselessly without ever being able to win
                  >> the
                  >> presidency
                  >> and in the last decade without ever being able to win even a single
                  >> congressional or senate seat.
                  >>
                  >
                  > I'd say we're screwed, then, since neither of the majority parties are
                  > likely to support any change that might dethrone them and the general
                  > public has little comprehension or interest in alternative voting
                  > systems.
                  >
                  > We range-voting enthusiasts really need a public success to point at.
                  > Perhaps the entrepreneurial strategy from Crossing the
                  > Chasm<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Chasm_(book)> might
                  > be applicable. The author, Geoffrey Moore, identifies an analogous
                  > problem
                  > that faces most early stage start-ups. The prescription is to
                  > identify a
                  > target market that's small enough to dominate with the resources
                  > available.
                  > Perhaps we should try something similar -- perhaps by identifying one
                  > municipality or county in the country with a populace and political
                  > situation that are conducive to giving range voting a fair try -- and
                  > focusing as much effort as we can muster into getting them to do
                  > so. I
                  > don't have an immediate candidate in mind or even a good idea as to
                  > what
                  > the criteria for selection should be but perhaps some of the more
                  > politically astute among you can help with that.
                  >
                  > just my $.02
                  > Mike
                • WarrenS
                  ... --not necessarily. The interests of individual republicans or donors might differ from the abstract collective interest of the party. ... --that s a
                  Message 8 of 11 , Dec 4, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > I'd say we're screwed, then, since neither of the majority parties are
                    > likely to support any change that might dethrone them

                    --not necessarily. The interests of individual republicans or donors might
                    differ from the abstract collective interest of "the party."

                    > and the general
                    > public has little comprehension or interest in alternative voting systems.

                    --that's a problem...
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.