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

FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 99 posts

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#31

Post by colanderman »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #20
marshallp wrote: post #19

Of course, none of this actually matters anymore. The corporo-verlords have bought both parties. The only way is parliamentary system with proportional representation. This isn't a political statement, just that hackers should investigate how to hack the system into that form. One clever hack is being done by John Koza (inventor of genetic programming) to do away with the electoral college http://www.nationalpopularv…

Why do people love to act like both parties are the same? Is it just errant, broad pessimism? I understand wanting more options or not liking either available option but they're not the same. They don't have the same values, beliefs, principles, policies or experiences. They have many things in common, but they're not the same and it's not useless to talk about them and their perception in the polls.

If they weren't similar, then it would behoove them to become more so, lest the other party move to sway undecided voters.

Plurality voting ensures that there are two major parties, and that they are as similar as possible without ceding ground to third parties.

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#32

Post by drivebyacct2 »

elsurudo wrote: post #27
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people love to act like both parties are the same? Is it just errant, broad pessimism? I understand wanting more options or not liking either available option but they're not the same. They don't have the same values, beliefs, principles, policies or experiences. They have many things in common, but they're not the same and it's not useless to talk about them and their perception in the polls.

The point isn't that they're "the same". It's that they're the same _where it matters_. That they are both bought and paid for by the same corporate money. Where do the hundreds of millions to fund the campaigns come from? You don't think that those interests might, you know, want something in return? All mainstream political "discussion" is simply a distraction from the true issues. To think anything else is just na…

>It's that they're the same _where it matters_.

Quite frankly, that's bullshit. Romney/Ryan advocate a rollback of my rights and continued (or furthered) discrimination against me. That's only one small social issue that they differ on and they differ on policies that involve much more substantive issues.

Maybe you're privileged or fortunate enough to not be affected by tax rates, women's rights legislation, gay rights issues, and more, but many of us aren't. Those issues matter and that's why some support Romney and some support Obama.

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#33

Post by anon102012 »

marshallp wrote: post #28
anon102012 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "parliamentary system" means a system where legislative elections are held and the party or coalition of parties that garners a majority then forms the executive branch of the government, and one member of the legislature is chosen to serve as the "prime minister" or head of the executive branch. Americans would never accept a system that did not allow them to select their chief executives (presidents, governors, m…

Hackers should hack them into it.

Why? If you want PR, you can have that with a presidential system. See Brazil as an example. Americans have had presidential systems since before the country was founded (the colonial governments), have enjoyed virtually unparalleled stability with them, and show no eagerness to abandon them.

In fact, the UK, one of the oldest parliamentary democracies in the world and the originator of the "Westminster System" used in most Anglophone countries, moved towards presidentialism with the Local Government Act 2003 that allowed directly-elected mayors, such as London's colorful Boris Johnson.

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#34

Post by marshallp »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #32
elsurudo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point isn't that they're "the same". It's that they're the same _where it matters_. That they are both bought and paid for by the same corporate money. Where do the hundreds of millions to fund the campaigns come from? You don't think that those interests might, you know, want something in return? All mainstream political "discussion" is simply a distraction from the true issues. To think anything else is just na…

>It's that they're the same _where it matters_. Quite frankly, that's bullshit. Romney/Ryan advocate a rollback of my rights and continued (or furthered) discrimination against me. That's only one small social issue that they differ on and they differ on policies that involve much more substantive issues. Maybe you're privileged or fortunate enough to not be affected by tax rates, women's rights legislation, gay righ…

I wouldn't consider those really substantive compared to drawback of the military-industrial complex, radical increase in nasa/science funding, full free national health-care (including dentistry), overhaul of the education system (along the lines advocated by khan academy), ending the drug war, ending corporate welfare (and maybe even corporate personhood), and probably other major ones I can't think of right now.

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#35

Post by mbell »

derleth wrote: post #30
mbell wrote: post #17

It would be awesome if this could somehow incorporate relative positions of the parties over time, perhaps by 'waving' the center line left-right as well. For example it could be argued that republicans during Nixon's time were closer to middle of the road democrats of today in terms of overall platform.

> it could be argued that republicans during Nixon's time were closer to middle road democrats of today in terms of overall platform. That's because it's correct, depending on what you mean by 'middle road Democrat'. Nixon created the EPA, created OSHA, signed Title IX into existence, ended the Vietnam war, and endorsed the Equal Rights Amendment, which nevertheless failed to pass. He couldn't have done a lot of thos…

I explicitly worded it that way in an effort to avoid turning this into a political debate...

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#36

Post by true_religion »

dennisgorelik wrote: post #24
Dove wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I know cities tend to vote liberal, but DC has always seemed extreme to me, even accounting for that. I mean, I don't have data for how big cities vote in general, but I thought it was something like 70% liberal. A solid majority and dissenters. But DC voted 93% Democrat in 2008. 93! That's not a majority. That's a consensus.

DC is fed by US government. Democrats are pro-government, so DC votes for Democrats.

More info:

- Many in the DC metro area are also employed by the military or employed by proxy (i.e. working for a contractor like Boing/Lockheed/Caci/etc.).

- The military is a part of the government.

- The republican party is firmly behind the military.

Unsurprisingly the outlying suburbs of the DC metro area are lean republican[1].

Looks like everyone is voting for their own interests here.

[1] http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/elections/Multiyear3.gif

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#37

Post by drivebyacct2 »

marshallp wrote: post #34
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's that they're the same _where it matters_. Quite frankly, that's bullshit. Romney/Ryan advocate a rollback of my rights and continued (or furthered) discrimination against me. That's only one small social issue that they differ on and they differ on policies that involve much more substantive issues. Maybe you're privileged or fortunate enough to not be affected by tax rates, women's rights legislation, gay righ…

I wouldn't consider those really substantive compared to drawback of the military-industrial complex, radical increase in nasa/science funding, full free national health-care (including dentistry), overhaul of the education system (along the lines advocated by khan academy), ending the drug war, ending corporate welfare (and maybe even corporate personhood), and probably other major ones I can't think of right now.

Those issues affect me every, single day in a tangible primary fashion. The other problems, yes, are frustrating. Romney and Obama differ on how the feel towards funding that military industrial complex, and in a telling way given what you're discussing and the nature of the industrial complex.

As for national health-care, education, science, etc, they very noticeably and very starkly differ as well.

... I feel like you just supported what I was saying. My second post was simply an example of how they differ in meaningful ways.

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#38

Post by grecy »

netmau5 wrote: post #10
Dove wrote: post #8

I am always astonished by what an outlier DC is.

I'm not. If you ever visit, it's pretty clear where each economic group lives. Practically anyone with money who works in DC lives in VA or MD. DC has the highest ghetto per capita in the world.

> DC has the highest ghetto per capita in the world.

Do you have a source for that?

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#39

Post by ryanwaggoner »

dennisgorelik wrote: post #24
Dove wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I know cities tend to vote liberal, but DC has always seemed extreme to me, even accounting for that. I mean, I don't have data for how big cities vote in general, but I thought it was something like 70% liberal. A solid majority and dissenters. But DC voted 93% Democrat in 2008. 93! That's not a majority. That's a consensus.

DC is fed by US government. Democrats are pro-government, so DC votes for Democrats.

It's possible that is a factor, but DC is >50% black, so it wouldn't be surprising to see a huge majority for Obama in 2008.

Re: FiveThirtyEight: Over the Decades, How States Have Shifted

#40

Post by _delirium »

Dove wrote: post #16
jcdreads wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is almost entirely big city. Most American cities, considered by themselves, would be over there on the left with Washington. Here's a visualization of this; mostly bluer cities and mostly redder non-city: http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/

Yeah, I know cities tend to vote liberal, but DC has always seemed extreme to me, even accounting for that. I mean, I don't have data for how big cities vote in general, but I thought it was something like 70% liberal. A solid majority and dissenters. But DC voted 93% Democrat in 2008. 93! That's not a majority. That's a consensus.

It's on the high end, but I think around 80-90% Democratic for an urban core is fairly common. It's hard to get exact numbers because it depends on where lines are drawn. For example, Cook County (where Chicago is located) "only" voted 76% Obama, but it includes a number of suburban areas, and would be >80% if you pruned them.

Here are the next-most-Democratic cities I came across in some spot-checking, with NYC boroughs broken out b/c they're separate counties: 89% Bronx (NYC), 86% Manhattan (NYC), 84% San Francisco, 80% Brooklyn (NYC), 79% Boston, 79% Alameda County (East Bay), 77% Portland.

Silicon Valley is closer to the 70-ish you're thinking of, but it includes a number of quite suburban areas. Obama won 74% in San Mateo County, and 70% in San Jose County. LA County is about the same (70%), as is Fulton County (Atlanta).

Post reply on HN