Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

themacro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 458 posts

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#211

Post by kidcoach »

seomis wrote: post #42

To those commenting with some variation of "only informed citizens should vote," pause and consider how much overlap there is with your idea of what an "informed" voter is with race/class lines. You may be unwittingly (or wittingly in some cases?) insisting that voters in the US should be, disproportionately, wealthier whites.

I know politically informed minimum wage folks, and some really politically-flawed doctors and upper-level managers who spend so much time on their job or kids they don't care to read into politics. The "informed voters = rich whiteys" theory is just an assumption that infers people who want informed voters are often racist. Lets leave race out of such discussions and stick with how we could make an unbiased solution (race/class blind qualifier tests or whatever).

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#212

Post by hackuser »

JacobJans wrote: post #173
baron816 wrote: post #156

The biggest reason people in the US don't vote is because they don't have enough options so they never get to choose people they really care about. Plus, no individual vote matters. This all has to do with our winner-take-all elections. Countries with proportional representation have much higher voter turnout rates (often in the 80-90% range). That's because you get to vote for the person or party you want, and they'…

One of the worst lies perpetuated by the media is that the presidential election is the only one that really matters. There are so many elections that have a direct impact on your life that you can participate in – state, city, and county election. These are not generally very partisan. Sadly, local elections often don't have enough options simply because there aren't enough politicians standing for election.

> One of the worst lies perpetuated by the media is that the presidential election is the only one that really matters.

I haven't seen this suggested in the media.

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#213

Post by Animats »

debracleaver wrote: post #2

Hey everyone. Debra Cleaver here, founder of Vote.org. I am ready to answer all of your questions about voting in the US, as long as they are non-partisan. Partisan questions should be directed to your local political party. I'm especially keen to talk about ways we can use technology to modernize the election process. My current focus is how we can use electronic signatures to roll out online voter registration in s…

Well, first you have to make your site work. Your site says that I'm not registered to vote in San Mateo County, California. But San Mateo County's site, "https://www.shapethefuture.org/MyElectionMaterials/default.a..., says that I am.

Also, you collected my email address. That's mandatory before you do the registration check. Why? I don't want to be "onboarded", and if I was, I want to be "offboarded". I just wrote to "info@vote.com" about that.

From your terms:

We may use Personal Information:

To send you informational communications that we believe may be of interest to you.

To send you marketing communications that we believe may be of interest to you.

...

We may use Flash LSOs and other technologies to, among other things, collect and store information about your use of the Services.

So this is really about building a mailing list you can spam, while tracking users to collect their behavior patterns.

FAIL

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#214

Post by danieltillett »

hueving wrote: post #195
danieltillett wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop voting for someone and start voting against someone. Pick the least worst candidate and give them your vote.

It's sort of the train switch moral question. If you hate them both but hate one slight more, voting for the lesser hated one makes you morally responsible for the shit they cause in some peoples' view (as opposed to being a bystander).

No by not voting you are implicitly giving them half a vote each. You don't get to opt out of the decision of who wins by not voting.

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#216

Post by dragonwriter »

hueving wrote: post #189
hnamazon123 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly, strongly suspect that the primary motivation for this comes from the fact that higher voter turnout tends to favor democrats. http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/3/progressives-ne...

If that were true, why wouldn't the government try to push mandatory voting laws when it had leadership from the Democrat party?

> If that were true, why wouldn't the government try to push mandatory voting laws when it had leadership from the Democrat party?

Because the Democratic Party prefers to expand voting by expanding access (making it easier to register, and easier to vote by expanding times, methods, etc.) rather than by personal mandates and threats of punishment.

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#218

Post by akio »

hackuser wrote: post #212
JacobJans wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the worst lies perpetuated by the media is that the presidential election is the only one that really matters. There are so many elections that have a direct impact on your life that you can participate in – state, city, and county election. These are not generally very partisan. Sadly, local elections often don't have enough options simply because there aren't enough politicians standing for election.

> One of the worst lies perpetuated by the media is that the presidential election is the only one that really matters. I haven't seen this suggested in the media.

It may not be intentional, but it is implied by the widely unbalanced attention given to the presidential election.

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#219

Post by DrScump »

Retric wrote: post #113
burkaman wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>wouldn't every candidate attempt to win their elections by appealing to the lowest common denominator? I think that's sort of how democracy is supposed to work. Politicians win when they can convince more people than anyone else. It's like that famous quote: “democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others”. Yes, everything would be better if countries were run by benevolent geniuses who always…

One of the more interesting ideas I have rarely seen in fiction is an actual benevolent and wise AI taking over. Closest is probably the Culture novels which shows up as a very odd society.

Check out the Twilight Zone episode "The Old Man in the Cave" for one example.

Re: Vote.org is a non-profit that wants to get the U.S. to 100% voter turnout

#220

Post by michaelkeenan »

Retric wrote: post #95
jqm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each potential voter decides if they are informed enough. Or at least interested enough. And the two probably go together.

I find more informed people are often less motivated to vote.

According to the sidebar in the Wikipedia article on voter turnout[1], increasing education leads to increasing likelihood to vote.

38% - No high school 43% - Some high school 57% - High school graduate 66% - Some college 79% - College grad 84% - Post-graduate

Though, possibly, being educated isn't the same thing as being informed.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout#Socio-economic_f...

Post reply on HN