Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (17256)	5/27/2005 9:00:54 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 20773

Re: Our party platforms are written, but perhaps with only a bit of exaggeration they are largely ignored. No candidate is bound by the party platform; We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. As you might recall, Sen. Arlen Specter faced a very strong challenge in the Pennsylvania primary in 2004 because Specter does not strictly adhere to the right wing platform. George Voinovich is currently being targeted by the right wing because of his stance on the Bolton nomination. The Reich Wing is extremely vindictive and attacks the moderates within the Republican party with almost as much zeal as they attack Democrats. The Texas Republican Party Platform theocracywatch.org is an absolutely terrifying document for anyone who hopes to maintain a constitutional democracy in the United States. The Texans seem to be at the forefront of the extreme insanity of theocratic totalitarianism in the nation. I find most of the people who support this crap to be too insane to hold political power. Unfortunately, they hold a lot of it. But the good news is that the first trial bringing Tom DeLay down was adjudicated yesterday. In a civil suit, 5 Democrats won a $200,000 settlement against TRMPAC: politicalaffairs.net

To: jttmab who wrote (17256)	5/28/2005 2:59:11 AM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 20773

"to really rank political systems of democratic republics". Ref the Denmark-Germany case, with "one or two votes" in a mixed-system. There is, according to what I have picked up, a frusttration in Denmark in terms of having to make that (tactical) decision of voting person or party. One must estimate how the FPTP local election will turn out, consider how the overall nationwide situation is, and then decide on voting "(local) person or (nationwide) party" However, in Germany (where one votes within both systems) that problem does not exist as such. However, one can claim that the system makes some other "destructive" voting practices possible, but that should be fairly similar for both systems. That is, if one strongly favors one party, if, for example, one knows that party will win either locally or nationwide, it is possible to vote "against the other major party" by voting for their extremes, or something similar. (destructive, negative voting) PS On that topic, STV includes setting up candidates in order of preference, 1,2,3.... Some systems have also included a possibility to vote _against_ candidates, marking "negative preference".. I do not think that is used anywhere anymore, although Russia has something slightly similar in terms of their FPTP system, one can vote "None Of Above" and those votes are also counted. (NOA has been a somewhat popular suggestion in US too??)

To: jttmab who wrote (17256)	5/28/2005 3:45:25 AM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 20773

"conditioning to vote for persons, not parties" One can combine voting for "person and party" by using what is called "open party-lists". Maybe easier to describe by also considering "closed party-lists": - in both systems the votes are first added for the (whole) party, the candidates are then picked off the list, from the top, in accordance with the total votes for the party (proportional representation for the party) closed lists: ("pre-made" lists) - the party sets up the lists with the candidates in a specific order, before the elections. Usually done by voting (within the party) during a party-congress. Regular voters vote on "party" (while party-members have already voted "on person") open lists: ("open" until the election) - voters vote on "person" and the order on the list (for that party) is determined by the amount of votes the specific candidates got in the election. "open lists" are considered more "democratic" while "closed lists" are considering giving too much power the the "party elite". However, in very "explosive, unstable" cases the "party elite" might be expected to have a "stablizing" effect (or the opposite?). Israel is maybe one of the most "important" closed-list cases... PS That is, if the party puts Sharon in the first position on their list it is 100% sure he will be elected (except if his party loses almost all votes). In an open-list system his position would be according to the personal votes he gets and if he does not get many he will not be elected. (the opposite is also true, somebody might suddenly get enough votes to get high enough up on the list to become elected)

To: jttmab who wrote (17256)	5/28/2005 3:59:10 AM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 20773

"conditioning to vote for persons, not parties" STV makes that possible, although the proportionality is fairly low compared to "real" PR. "Tactical voting" is also possible.. That is, in STV (Single Transferable Vote) one marks a 1,2,3.. preference for candidates (persons). (either within the same party or from different parties) If the candidate marked as #1 doesn't get elected (in the first "round"), some portion of ones vote is transfered to #2 (for the "second round"), if that one is not elected, to #3, etc.. That is, it is only in "closed list" systems where one (only) votes for "party". But to my knowledge nobody uses a mixed system were the list-system (PR) would be "open list"?? That is, 100% FPTP systems like US-UK-Canada-etc seem to have two possible solutions: - STV (with multimember districts) - mixed systems (the old one plus an additionl PR-system) PS as in Canada, many claim that the reforms should start "locally", for local elections, city,county or state.