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

Remind HN: Vote

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 391 posts

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#261

Post by dkl »

kgosser wrote: post #133
CWuestefeld wrote: post #127

Please, do vote if you understand the issues, and where the candidates stand. But otherwise, please DO NOT VOTE. Just because an idea makes you feel warm and fuzzy doesn't make it right. There are plenty of things in this world that are counter-intuitive, and if you're relying only on your beliefs , there's a good chance you'll get it wrong. If you've never taken a class or read a book on economics, please don't vote…

Seth Godin disagrees with you: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/11/voting-misun... Additionally, "if you understand the issues" is a vague, relative parameter. I know in the state of wisconsin I don't know 100% of the issues (and probably not even 50%, sadly. Been a busy year), but I know enough of what I like and dislike about the Governor and Senate battles to vote with confidence. I think your argument…

In fact, in CA not understanding a proposition is grounds for voting "No", because a No vote keeps the status quo. If the people framing the debate haven't done a good enough job, then they deserve the No vote.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#262

Post by umjames »

If the US truly believes that voting is important, why don't they make election day a national holiday so the voters don't have to worry about possibly conflicting work schedules keeping them from the polls? It's only 1 day, and it happens once every 2 years. Employers can't spare that?

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#263

Post by nollidge »

hnal943 wrote: post #167
jbooth wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, hopefully you're voting for Feingold. That guy's been one of the best senators of the last 20 years, honest, doesn't take any lobbyist money and a fiscal conservative, too, but he's in danger of losing to a guy who's entire platform is "I'm not a socialist" (Feingold isn't either).

No one has brought up socialism in this campaign at all. Ron Johnson has run a specific, issue oriented campaign. His major focus is stopping the run away spending of the Obama agenda. He entered the race when Obamacare passed, because he felt that was the last straw. Feingold on the other hand is standing by his vote for Obamacare. I haven't forgotten the disdainful smirk on his face when he addressed his enraged co…

He didn't ignore my will, and I'm a people and a fellow Wisconsinite. Please don't act like you speak for me, or any more than 50±10% of the Wisconsin public.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#264

Post by NickPollard »

Jun8 wrote: post #255
CWuestefeld wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry that you're offended. However, stating that you are offended, and then re-asserting your belief in voting really doesn't do anything to show my where the error is in my argument. I'd have an easier time understanding where I've gone astray if you could address my two questions: 1. Is it immoral to vote by dice? 2. In what ways does an ignorant voter, reacting emotionally to propaganda, differ from voting by…

Seriously, I thought you were being tongue in cheek in your comments. If you're serious, then your idea of rating people according to some measure (you advocate some hazy notion of informedness, but it's not important what it is) and denying people who score low is outrageous. In fact, in principle, this is no different than saying blacks, or women, or gays, etc. should not vote! Let me state it simply: Voting is a r…

Whilst I don't necessarily agree with limiting voting by knowledge or intelligence, I do think people are too quick to shun it without thought. If it's so wrong, explain why, rationally, not with an appeal to morality. Otherwise it reeks of 'What you can't say' [1].

Would you want an uninformed, unintelligent leader? If not, would you want uninformed, unintelligent people to choose a leader?

Of course, I do agree that there are issues with the proposal - self-selection would be a bad choice thanks to Dunning-Kruger [2] - and I do agree that any kind of 'you must have an IQ this high to vote' would be a bad idea, due to those entrenched in power setting the requirements.

Personally, I would prefer a solution based on better political and economic education, but that's such a difficult problem.

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#265

Post by [deleted] »

pasbesoin wrote: post #209

I decided not to post this to HN as a topic, even though it is non-partisan and I support the message. But since there is already this "vote" thread, I offer your this perspective and perhaps motivation: [2008] Craig Ferguson: If you don't vote, you're a moron http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdRVQ4xwwmQ#t=06m25s The above link "cuts to the chase"; however, the entire monologue is worth watching (more commentary on the…

[deleted]

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#266

Post by jfager »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #127

Please, do vote if you understand the issues, and where the candidates stand. But otherwise, please DO NOT VOTE. Just because an idea makes you feel warm and fuzzy doesn't make it right. There are plenty of things in this world that are counter-intuitive, and if you're relying only on your beliefs , there's a good chance you'll get it wrong. If you've never taken a class or read a book on economics, please don't vote…

Having people disenfranchise themselves based on whether or not they feel they have an adequate grasp on the real issues would not end as you'd hope. Are you familiar with the Dunning-Kruger effect? If people took your advice to heart, the likely result would actually be a less-informed electorate: the only people who would actually disqualify themselves would be the only ones thoughtful and self-critical enough to countenance the possibility that they weren't qualified.

There is no principled way to distinguish between a vote based on propaganda from a vote based on knowledge that doesn't actively disenfranchise voters. So why even try? Just vote your say, and rather than expending your energy trying to keep people out of the ballot box, expend it on educating them.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#268

Post by dkl »

protomyth wrote: post #250
vaksel wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny you should say that since North Dakota is the second biggest leech in this country. You guys get $2.03 for every dollar you send. (2nd highest in the nation after DC) California could balance it's budgets too, if it got double what it paid in federal taxes every year.

Your source? If you count defense spending (CA didn't want the ICBM silos), 2 air force bases, and interstate highway, yeah. We are on the border, have a low population, and are a truck route (I94 and Hwy2). Having 600,000 people will skew a lot of stats. Counting the reservations in that number might be a little deceptive. Also, do we count the ongoing flooding? If the gov would clear an outlet or just let us move a…

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

shows it to not be #2 but close to the top.

And I think the point is still valid that CA could balance their budget if we had that nice ratio.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#269

Post by pjscott »

jswinghammer wrote: post #141
jrockway wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may want to rethink this strategy, because this is not what's going to happen.

Can you really say that voting has made things better?

Hold on. What happened to your original claim that, by not voting, you were sending a stronger signal of your libertarian views than you would by showing up and voting for libertarian candidates? Did you concede that point, or are you still holding onto it, or what?

Please pardon me if this seems obsessive-compulsive, but there's an interesting pathological form of "debate" where someone keeps throwing arguments out, ignoring any refutations, then declares victory. Of course I'm not accusing you of this -- such an accusation would be very flimsy -- but it's always something to watch out for.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#270

Post by [deleted] »

Jun8 wrote: post #255
CWuestefeld wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry that you're offended. However, stating that you are offended, and then re-asserting your belief in voting really doesn't do anything to show my where the error is in my argument. I'd have an easier time understanding where I've gone astray if you could address my two questions: 1. Is it immoral to vote by dice? 2. In what ways does an ignorant voter, reacting emotionally to propaganda, differ from voting by…

Seriously, I thought you were being tongue in cheek in your comments. If you're serious, then your idea of rating people according to some measure (you advocate some hazy notion of informedness, but it's not important what it is) and denying people who score low is outrageous. In fact, in principle, this is no different than saying blacks, or women, or gays, etc. should not vote! Let me state it simply: Voting is a r…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN