[FRIAM] voter suppression video in NM, OT
sorry to bring this to your attention, and sorry it is happening http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/04/961231/video-republican-party-training-poll-challengers-in-illegal-voter-suppression/ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Expanding the Debate
On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: I read the books listed in the reverse of the order in which I listed them. Perhaps because of that, I think the order of relevance is also increasing. In particular, the authors of IEWTIL (rhymes with futile) explain why they believe a third party would not improve the situation at all: If anything, the opposite, in part because a third party would most likely take votes from the Democrats. The constitution was designed to prevent a majority from riding roughshod over a significant minority. The Republicans have realized that the rules enable them to stop (almost) all movement. The parties are acting in Parliamentary fashion (voting in lockstep), when the Constitution was designed without any consideration of that possibility. Indeed, when the Constitution was formed, the idea of political parties would have been appalling to the founding fathers (and would perhaps have been considered unpatriotic). (After all, they had shortly before united to fight a war to throw off the British yoke.) For those interested in voting systems, towards the end of the book the authors suggest alternate voting regimes. There are several interesting suggestions for improving the present situation. For myself, I am coming to believe the only hope is for the Democrats to retake control of both houses and the presidency, so as to enable them to push through voting reform. Although, in fairness, it is not clear that they would do that it they did gain control. But I do not see any other way to implement change to the current situation. Joe On 10/4/12 4:39 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Joe - All very interesting, but I would suggest reading the books I recommended a few posts back to understand the issues and some of the (possibly feasible) solutions. I appreciated your suggestions during a previous thread on Politics: / Democracy Lost, by Lawrence Lessig, Harvard Law professor - the corrupting influence of money on Washington // // //The Price of Inequality, by Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Laureate in Economics - the increasing inequality in the US and its impact, as well as various responses to conservative economic orthodoxies // // //It's Even Worse Than It Looks, by Thomas E. Mann (Brookings Institution) and Norman J. Ornstein (American Enterprise Institute) - why congress is almost completely ineffectual and what might be done about it. / I am, in fact familiar with some of these writers works and ideas and generally agree with them and think their ideas are important. I'm focusing on raising awareness for the need to break the bipartisan stranglehold on elections (and public debate) right now simply because the opportunity is here right now... our nose is being rubbed in how lame the process and structure of Presidential Campaigns, Debates, Elections have become. Lessig addresses this more than the other two I think. I definitely don't think that it is nearly enough to introduce a third (or several more) parties. But it might be necessary? - Steve On 10/4/12 2:19 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Doug - I'm voting for Gary as my mechanism for voting against Romney, and lackluster Obama. I don't know how accurate/useful/neutral this particular map is: http://freedomslighthouse.net/2012-presidential-election-electoral-vote-map/ But it suggests to me that many who are voting for Obama to vote *against* Romney/'Pubs/etc. can afford to risk wasting their vote by voting *for* any third party. And alternatively, those who might actually *want* Romney might accept that he's not happening this time around and vote *for* the choice of a third party. My personal preference *is* Gary Johnson despite my general mistrust of self-declared Liberatarians. I think he could do a better job handling the *important* issues for *both* parties than the candidates fielded. I'm very conflicted about Obama's performance... I understand the general malaise represented by your desription as lackluster... but I'm also willing to see him in for 4 more years. It looks pretty likely he will get that chance. Meanwhile I want to vote *for* third party representation and alternatives to Red/Blue. This looks like the chance. For those who are interested, BTW, https://voterview.state.nm.us/ will let you look up your registration status. It seems a little too easy to look up (name, birthdate?) but I guess this *is* public information?! The psuedo-debates on Democracy Now with the Green and the Justice party gave me hope... neither of the candidates came off as whackadoodles... which I'm not sure I can say for Romney (though the constrained/scripted debate format helps hide that side of him). - Steve --Doug On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com mailto:sasm...@swcp.com wrote: I've been out of the mix for a while, so I missed this:
Re: [FRIAM] Expanding the Debate
Sorry for the blank e-mail. Historically it seems that dynastic succession gives the longest stable political systems to enable nation building. On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: For those interested in voting systems, towards the end of the book the authors suggest alternate voting regimes. There are several interesting suggestions for improving the present situation. For myself, I am coming to believe the only hope is for the Democrats to retake control of both houses and the presidency, so as to enable them to push through voting reform. Although, in fairness, it is not clear that they would do that it they did gain control. But I do not see any other way to implement change to the current situation. Joe FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Expanding the Debate
So.. W. was the great enabler ? Sorry. Couldn't resist. On 10/5/12 10:15 AM, Sarbajit Roy wrote: Sorry for the blank e-mail. Historically it seems that dynastic succession gives the longest stable political systems to enable nation building. On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: For those interested in voting systems, towards the end of the book the authors suggest alternate voting regimes. There are several interesting suggestions for improving the present situation. For myself, I am coming to believe the only hope is for the Democrats to retake control of both houses and the presidency, so as to enable them to push through voting reform. Although, in fairness, it is not clear that they would do that it they did gain control. But I do not see any other way to implement change to the current situation. Joe FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Sunlight is the best disinfectant. -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Expanding the Debate
http://www.quora.com/Are-all-the-US-Presidents-related-to-each-other It seems that except for Martin Buren, all the US Presidents are descended from evil King John. On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: So.. W. was the great enabler ? Sorry. Couldn't resist. On 10/5/12 10:15 AM, Sarbajit Roy wrote: Sorry for the blank e-mail. Historically it seems that dynastic succession gives the longest stable political systems to enable nation building. On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: For those interested in voting systems, towards the end of the book the authors suggest alternate voting regimes. There are several interesting suggestions for improving the present situation. For myself, I am coming to believe the only hope is for the Democrats to retake control of both houses and the presidency, so as to enable them to push through voting reform. Although, in fairness, it is not clear that they would do that it they did gain control. But I do not see any other way to implement change to the current situation. Joe FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Sunlight is the best disinfectant. -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Expanding the Debate
Sarbajit wrote... http://www.quora.com/Are-all-the-US-Presidents-related-to-each-other It seems that except for Martin Buren, all the US Presidents are descended from evil King John. They are all also probably descended from Genghis Khan as well... but then, so are you and I! By coincidence, I've a friend in Santa Fe who is descended from Van Buren... King John or not, the blood there is still rather cyanotic... I understand Joe's implication about splitting the vote and I'm not interested in helping the candidate with the most inflexible, hard-headed supporters (those less likely to be split), but rather, as he implies a change in structure where we can vote for who we *really* while also voting for *the lesser of other evils*. I'm more interested in how the debate (the general debate among all of us, not the televised one between anointed candidates) is shaped. Politics is at best, a necessary evil. Leadership and discussion in the building of a dynamic, progressive culture is what I seek, not statesmanship or nation building, much less grandstanding, fearmongering, special-interest-leveraging, etc. (also Mom and Apple Pie while I'm at it...) - Steve On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: So.. W. was the great enabler ? Sorry. Couldn't resist. On 10/5/12 10:15 AM, Sarbajit Roy wrote: Sorry for the blank e-mail. Historically it seems that dynastic succession gives the longest stable political systems to enable nation building. On 10/5/12, Joseph Spinden j...@qri.us wrote: For those interested in voting systems, towards the end of the book the authors suggest alternate voting regimes. There are several interesting suggestions for improving the present situation. For myself, I am coming to believe the only hope is for the Democrats to retake control of both houses and the presidency, so as to enable them to push through voting reform. Although, in fairness, it is not clear that they would do that it they did gain control. But I do not see any other way to implement change to the current situation. Joe FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Sunlight is the best disinfectant. -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Expanding the Debate
Only 1 in 200 men are descended from Genghis Khan. http://www.cell.com/AJHG/retrieve/pii/S0002929707605874 I am not. Your premise about splitting the vote is fallacious. 1) Nothing you, Joe or this mailing list does is going to affect the outcome on Nov 6. 2) A vote by its very definition incorporates a split 3) It seems that 40% of the voting US population doesn't fall into the hard-headed camp (they identify themselves as Independents) [http://www.webcitation.org/690ibz8mi] and for them TV debates would have more impact than the discussions at FRIAM sigh 4) Mitt Romney apparently picked up 4 percent of the Independent vote after the first TV debate. 5) In advanced democracies, the swing/independent voters vote for CHANGE .. the anti-incumbency effect. Whereas in the US it seems that the Independent voters are the timid ones who prefer the known evil to the unknown one. 6) Based on this [http://www.webcitation.org/690ibz8mi] it seems that more Democrats would vote for Romney than Republicans for Obama. On 10/6/12, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Sarbajit wrote... http://www.quora.com/Are-all-the-US-Presidents-related-to-each-other It seems that except for Martin Buren, all the US Presidents are descended from evil King John. They are all also probably descended from Genghis Khan as well... but then, so are you and I! By coincidence, I've a friend in Santa Fe who is descended from Van Buren... King John or not, the blood there is still rather cyanotic... I understand Joe's implication about splitting the vote and I'm not interested in helping the candidate with the most inflexible, hard-headed supporters (those less likely to be split), but rather, as he implies a change in structure where we can vote for who we *really* while also voting for *the lesser of other evils*. I'm more interested in how the debate (the general debate among all of us, not the televised one between anointed candidates) is shaped. Politics is at best, a necessary evil. Leadership and discussion in the building of a dynamic, progressive culture is what I seek, not statesmanship or nation building, much less grandstanding, fearmongering, special-interest-leveraging, etc. (also Mom and Apple Pie while I'm at it...) - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
