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

chance of winning vs investment of moving, legally and physically.

Expand Messages
  • aditmore@juno.com
    It is true as LC wrote (and I lost the post) that the investment of moving one s vote is in some cases, like Texas, far less than the cost of a full physical
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 26, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      It is true as LC wrote (and I lost the post) that the investment of moving one's vote is in some cases, like Texas, far less than the cost of a full physical move, but some people, including many of the organizers and candidates, must fully, physically move; and legal moving still requires an investment.  Even in TX each voter must have physically been there at some point, so that is still a significant investment.
      Now what I said is that the vast majority, 99.9+%, of both Libertarians and NAPsters don't think the chance of winning is worth the investment, whatever that investment either really is or is percieved to be by them.  The investment may be percieved by them to be higher than it really is and it may not.  Also the value of winning a town or county is clearly percieved by over 99% of both NAPsters and Libertarians to be far lower than it actually is.
              Either way, The number of NAPsters who perceive the chance of winning to be worth the investment of moving is pretty clearly inadequate, under 100.  The number of Libertarians who percieve the chance of winning to be worth the investment is unkown and may be enough, but if we appeal only to NAPsters, we will never know.  If Libertarians take over or even significantly effect the policies of a town or county, it will start the snowball rolling and attract NAPsters, who may be able to gain majorities and win in later election cycles in the feedback loop, snowball process described so excellently in The Big Sort.
              Once a single town or county is known nationwide to be significantly more libertarian than any other, and possible to move into, the snowball will start rolling and more and more absolute libertarians will be attracted and more and more absolute candidates will be able to win in each successive election over time.
              As for whether Libertarians, or any group, can win a county without first winning a town, I do think it's possible, largely because Loving County has no towns.  But it is not really possible in any county that contains more than 3 or 4 towns.  In any such county, a town must be won, or founded, first, if only to establish symbolic Libertarian figureheads as a demonstration of winnability.  Though in reality we have demostrated that towns have significant power, even if outside New England, counties have far more.
      -Al


      ____________________________________________________________
      Turn life into a beach with a new sandbox. Click now!

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.