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

241–250 of 391 posts

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#241

Post by siculars »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #231
siculars wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have some nerve. You really do. Has it occurred to you that the mere act of participation in and exercising your right to vote is an act of "...knowledge and understanding..." in it's own right? I find the totality of your comments in this thread incredibly offensive. To suggest that citizens abdicate their right to vote is incredulous. I am of the opinion that every citizen should be encouraged to vote by any an…

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…

1. No, it is not immoral to vote by dice.

2. Imho, the act of voting in and of itself encompass a conscious decision to act. To act requires thought. Who are we to judge the beliefs or thought process that leads a citizen to vote?

Even if the voter was "reacting emotionally to propaganda", so what? I find it interesting that you use three very loaded words within a span of four.

Reacting. You paint this voter as reptilian. Incapable of thought and merely reacting to various primal instincts.

Emotionally. You impugn this voters ability to remain uncompromised and imply a certain level of deficit.

Propaganda. You concern yourself with the message the citizen receives and pass judgment as to whether or not it meets your standards of information.

[edit] Allow me to elaborate on your first question. You either have the right to vote or you do not. If I chose to vote based on which side of the bed I woke up on then so be it. To say otherwise is to assert your opinion over my right.  

You, Sir, are emotionally compromised on this issue.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#242

Post by [deleted] »

nene wrote: post #222
mahmud wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Estonia you can vote from almost anywhere if you have ID-card and working internet connection. By any chance, is your most recently elected president called "moot"? Is there or has there ever been a legal motion to rename the country to "4chanistan"? I think I might know what caused your recent problems, and it's not Russia or the EU.

> By any chance, is your most recently elected president called "moot"? Sorry. I don't understand this comment. Is it trying to say, that electronic voting is by definition a failure? It doesn't seem to criticize any specific aspect of the Estonian e-voting system. Or is it just calling names?

[deleted]

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#243

Post by hnal943 »

axod wrote: post #36
mbreese wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the alternative? I can't think of one that is morally acceptable.

Personally I would prefer a monarchy, or some merit based voting system - eg You get a vote if you can demonstrate you have the understanding to make informed decisions.

It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. -Churchill

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#244

Post by lmkg »

nene wrote: post #222
mahmud wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Estonia you can vote from almost anywhere if you have ID-card and working internet connection. By any chance, is your most recently elected president called "moot"? Is there or has there ever been a legal motion to rename the country to "4chanistan"? I think I might know what caused your recent problems, and it's not Russia or the EU.

> By any chance, is your most recently elected president called "moot"? Sorry. I don't understand this comment. Is it trying to say, that electronic voting is by definition a failure? It doesn't seem to criticize any specific aspect of the Estonian e-voting system. Or is it just calling names?

"moot" is the screenname of the founder of 4chan, who have a tendency to spoil online polls. For example: http://www.buzzfeed.com/reddit/also-the-work-of-4chan-pic

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#245

Post by jamesteow »

steveklabnik wrote: post #119
mbreese wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the alternative? I can't think of one that is morally acceptable.

Funny, I can't bring myself to vote because I can't find participating and legitimizing this morally acceptable.

I think that's a weird and very popular position.

So you don't vote allowing OTHERS to decide the process for you.

Other people who say, elect leaders who nominate Conservative Supreme Court Judges, who then side with the FEC allowing corporations to fund political advertisements. This was quite preventable.

I mean good on you for standing to your principles but with a whole collective of intelligent people abstaining, it's making it much easier for powerful people who want certain laws to happen... well happen.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#246

Post by rcthompson »

lusis wrote: post #237
dools wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to abstain in Australia because we have a preference system. In the States, when Nader ran against Gore it divided the Democrat vote and Bush won. The same thing doesn't happen in Australia so if you vote for a minor party because you really believe in their policies, although they may still preference a major party that you don't wholly agree with they still get funding based on the number of vote…

I have to call BS. This argument that third parties split the vote is nonsense. Me voting for a third-party candidate is does not imply that I would have voted for any other candidate had they not been on the ballot. Had that candidate not been on the ballot, I would have abstained from that particular position. It's like the BSA argument that people who steal software (yes it's stealing) would have normally bought t…

But if a third party happens to appeal to a similar demographic to one of the main parties (in this case, the Democrats, and the Gore campaign in particular), then it will split the vote. If you don't believe it, then the Bush campaign (Republicans) sure did, since they worked hard to promote the Green party and get them on as many ballots as they could.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#247

Post by jberryman »

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…

As others have mentioned, there is an epistemological issue with your point. You should not be so confident in your ability to judge whether others are making decisions based on their "beliefs" or informed rationality, nor in your own ability to choose rationally.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#248

Post by moxiemk1 »

hnal943 wrote: post #230
jbooth wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, democrats were primarily complaining that it was outrageously expensive, budget busting, and didn't even do any good because all of the money went straight to the drug companies (see my above comments on lobbyists). RE: Obama, you must be kidding. The man is a born compromiser, the problem is that Republicans haven't been willing to compromise on anything. They voted against their own deficit commission, for cryi…

Blaming the Republicans doesn't make any sense. Democrats have the votes to do whatever they want to do, which is why it's so easy this year to hold incumbents accountable.

No, they don't? The Republicans have used filibuster as a threat at an unprecedented level. The Senate has only nominally been in the Democrats' control.

EDIT: Punctuation

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#249

Post by jamesteow »

vaksel wrote: post #130

personally I don't vote for 3 reasons: 1. my vote doesn't matter. I live in a 100% blue state, it'll go Democrat no matter what. So whether I decide to vote democrat or republican or green, my vote really won't matter. + the redestricting is always aimed at propping up small states. Why does California and Delaware both get 2 senators? 2. the system is broken, there are no good politicians. There is no incentive for…

1: Point taken.

2: Really? So what about the ones that promote causes you care about? E.g. I care about net neutrality. There are politicians who care about these things and try to advance legislation aligning with these things. Saying all politicians are bad is just simplistic.

3: It takes like... one hour (if at all) out of the day. You can also mail your vote in. I'll agree that I'd prefer online voting, but it's one action in two years.

Re: Remind HN: Vote

#250

Post by protomyth »

vaksel wrote: post #193
protomyth wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as a resident of one of the red states that has our budget under control (ND - surplus), I don't think California's problems are of our doing. Unions in California shouldn't dictate policy to other states (and it looks like the other states are going to foot CA's bill). If we didn't have the current system, only about 20 cities would be campaigned in for the Presidency. Also, given the bill a NY Rep tried to pa…

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 couple of towns, we could probably cut the bill pretty nicely.
Post reply on HN