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

Live Presidential Forecast

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–318 of 318 posts

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#311

Post by throwanem »

Inconel wrote: post #308
ant6n wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. It's like being a Nazi in Germany -- why shouldn't they allowed to vote, chin up high, for the destruction of the lower races. It is, after all, just a political stance.

Your statement here, in addition to some of your other comments, is increasing going down a path of vilifying Trump voters as nothing more than racists, xenophobes, and now literal Nazis. You seem to leave no room for the possibility that while there are undoubtedly racists among the Trump supporters, and that Trump has made comments I would consider undignified, and I certainly didn't vote for him, there may be legi…

Don't do me any favors like that. He may be calling me the third guy down from Erich Röhm, but at least he's being upfront about it, and there's something refreshing in that kind of naked honesty. Ugly as it is, it does make a change from empty condescension.

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#312

Post by matwood »

551199 wrote: post #309
matwood wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When manufacturing and other jobs are outsourced who are going to buy the goods when your citizens can't afford them? The problem with manufacturing is it is not really outsourced, but automated. Unions helped to push out the jobs that were left by making it hard to compete wage wise. It's why you see plants opening in the south where there are no unions.

Sure, but we are going to have a big problem with people not working before we get full automation. Some people are fit to manual jobs rather than programming. There has to be some kind of solution.

I'm really coming around to some sort of basic income. We are quickly approaching a time where there are just not enough jobs. How we get from here to letting people live jobless is going to be a challenge.

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#313

Post by tedunangst »

Jtsummers wrote: post #270
tedunangst wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the reason we still have the election instead of just polling people is because the polls aren't always accurate.

Polls don't tell you who will vote. 60% of a state may be for one candidate, but if only 80% of them go out to vote, the other candidate will win. That's what we're seeing here today.

80% turnout. Hahaha.

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#314

Post by Jtsummers »

tedunangst wrote: post #313
Jtsummers wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polls don't tell you who will vote. 60% of a state may be for one candidate, but if only 80% of them go out to vote, the other candidate will win. That's what we're seeing here today.

80% turnout. Hahaha.

Fair, that would be way too high. I was really meaning to reference relative turnout for each candidate. That is, which party or candidate is better at actually getting their voters to do their job and vote.

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#316

Post by m_mueller »

551199 wrote: post #282
flukus wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone supporting trump is getting labeled a racist, misogynist, xenophobe. We've seen what happens to to people like Thiel and Eich, people try to get them black balled from the industry because they dare to disagree. Then someone openly flouting this "PC ideology" you've been getting increasingly frustrated by comes along they look quite appealing.

“The Advocate, a magazine that once raised me as a gay innovator, even published an article saying as of now I am, and I quote, ‘not a gay man’ because I don’t agree with their politics,” he announced. “The lie behind the buzzword of diversity could not be made more clear. If you don’t conform, then you don’t count as diverse. No matter what your personal background.” -Peter Thiel [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=…

Thank you for the link, that press conference is quite fascinating.

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#317

Post by quadrangle »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #101
quadrangle wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the entire system is screwed up by this insane electoral college. But majority-rule is insane even on a popular vote. The only good way to elect consensus candidates who serve everyone well is to implement score voting http://scorevoting.net/

Several systems work well for electing a good consensus candidate in a single-winner election, including Condorcet, Approval, and various forms of range voting.

Score voting is just another term for range voting. Approval is just score voting with the lowest resolution, effectively. Condorcet can elect a consensus candidate but inherently is worse at this than score/range/approval.

Condorcet is a rank system so Arrow's Impossibility Theorem applies. Also, being a rank system, there will always be arguments about interpretation where people can hand-wring over how the outcome would be different with Borda or IRV or another way to determine the results of a rank-vote election. Finally, Condorcet always supports tyranny-of-the-majority rather than consensus. A polarizing candidate with 51% support and 49% strong disapproval will always win any rank vote, while a consenus candidate everyone likes can win a score or approval vote.

Effectively, score is range is approval, same basic idea, and ONLY that idea is simple, clear, zero argument about interpreting results and none of the pathologies of rank voting. And no, rank voting is NOT able to elect consensus candidates over polarizing ones in the way score voting does.

Re: Live Presidential Forecast

#318

Post by quadrangle »

PDoyle wrote: post #105
quadrangle wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the entire system is screwed up by this insane electoral college. But majority-rule is insane even on a popular vote. The only good way to elect consensus candidates who serve everyone well is to implement score voting http://scorevoting.net/

I'm not sure it's the only way. There are ranked-ballot systems that are good too, like Single Transferable Vote. The point is, first-past-the-post has almost every possible flaw you can have in a voting system.

Nope STV is not so good, it still falls to Arrow's Impossibility Theorem which applies to every single rank voting system.

Sure, first-past-the-post is horrid, but if you expend political will, time, power, energy, money to reform the voting system, it's a tragedy to replace a horrible system with a bad one when we actually know of a good one. We will not get infinite, costless resources and chances for voting reform.

Post reply on HN