|
 mofo
Hobby Jingoist
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,232
Loc: Donkey Kong Kill Screen
|
 Voting Ethics 
#8956709 - 09/19/08 09:23 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Candidates A and B are front-runners in a virtual tie. Candidate Z is a dark horse with much less popular support. Tom is opposed to candidate A, indifferent to candidate B, and favors candidate Z. Voting for candidate B would help to work against A, however candidate B doesn't really measure up to Tom's expectations. Voting for candidate Z would fulfill Tom's preferences for a candidate, however it is virtually out of the question that candidate Z will win, and voting for Z could indirectly help A win. Who should Tom vote for?
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger
Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8956718 - 09/19/08 09:25 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Z man, no question about it.
|
 zouden
Neuroscientist
 
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8956756 - 09/19/08 09:34 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Z, then B, obviously. I presume you can vote for as many candidates as you like?
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
mofo
Hobby Jingoist
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,232
Loc: Donkey Kong Kill Screen
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: zouden]
#8956771 - 09/19/08 09:40 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zouden said:
Z, then B, obviously. I presume you can vote for as many candidates as you like?
One vote only. We're talking hypothetical presidential election here. And keep in mind, Tom's sentiments are more of a continuum than absolute values. He approves of about 20% of A's platform overall, 40% of B's, and 60% of Z's.
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8956829 - 09/19/08 10:02 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Then the strength of his vote is dependent on who he votes for; a vote for A or B will have a bigger effect than a vote for Z, thus there is incentive for him to vote for a candidate who wouldn't normally be his first choice.
This means the voting system is flawed and should be replaced.
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger
Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: zouden]
#8956846 - 09/19/08 10:10 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Replaced to what? It is hard to get around this problem when you are voting for one person, since there is only one spot to fill.
Maybe in the case of elected bodies such as congress, parliament, etc it would be more democratic if we didn't use the first past the post electoral system. Something like single transferable vote might work and fit better with the theme of democracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
|
Indeed, it's been known since the 18th century (the French philosopher Condorcet) that not all voting systems are created equal, and some are more fair than others. To continue to use a system like the one the OP described (first past the post) is against the spirit of democracy.
>Something like single transferable vote might work
It's been used worldwide for over a hundred years 
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
mofo
Hobby Jingoist
Registered: 04/05/08
Posts: 2,232
Loc: Donkey Kong Kill Screen
|
|
Yes, I am sure there are better voting methods available; the single transferable vote sounds good. However, my question assumes that the current voting system is unchangeable for the present time. In such a system, what would be the ethically correct decision?
EDIT: sorry, I forget sometimes that there are aussies and a lot of other nationalities represented here at the shroomery. I guess I'm a typical self-centered american.
Edited by mofo (09/19/08 10:28 PM)
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger
Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8956962 - 09/19/08 10:44 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I still think you should vote for Z. It is an illusion that voting for B is the best choice.
True "democracy" is rule by the people. Our current system is not true democracy but instead follows the theme of democracy. Voting "against" someone doesn't fit that theme at all.
Think about it... rule by the people that mean "you" rule. Our current system is just an approximation of that ideal where you vote for a proxy of yourself to represent yourself. You said Z is the best candidate for you, so you should vote for Z.
|
Sleepwalker
Overshoes
Registered: 05/07/08
Posts: 5,503
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8956971 - 09/19/08 10:48 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
A, B, and Z will all likely screw Tom over. He should vote for his best choice...or just write himself in. 
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8956988 - 09/19/08 10:52 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Okay, so assuming first-past-the-post...
You've conveniently quantified Tom's support for the candidates:
Quote:
He approves of about 20% of A's platform overall, 40% of B's, and 60% of Z's.
And, as you've said above, (and because of Duverger's law) it is impossible for candidate Z to win.
If A wins, Tom is 20% satisfied.
If B wins, Tom is 40% satisfied.
A vote for B increases B's chance of winning; it has a measurable effect towards a 40% satisfaction level.
A vote for Z does not affect who becomes president - it will still be A or B - however it may affect future elections if the main candidates start to consider the policies of Z. If the main candidates adopt any of Z's policies it pushes Tom's satisfaction towards 60%. However there is no guarantee of this happening, so the effect of a vote for Z is much lower, and much more difficult to measure.
Therefore, Tom's vote is more powerful, and more likely to improve his satisfaction level, if he votes for B. Anything else is reducing his democratic power and is less likely to result in a government he's satisfied with.
Exceptions:
1. If Tom disagrees with A & B's policies equally. This is pretty unlikely.
2. If his vote is worthless anyway, ie, because of electoral college bullshit.
Summary: first-past-the-post sucks.
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
hamandcheese
Sandwich
Registered: 06/02/08
Posts: 12,530
Loc: Next Level
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8957107 - 09/19/08 11:21 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
mofo said:
One vote only. We're talking hypothetical presidential election here. And keep in mind, Tom's sentiments are more of a continuum than absolute values. He approves of about 20% of A's platform overall, 40% of B's, and 60% of Z's.
given the circumstances, B is the logical choice despite Z being most preferable.
A is least prefered at 20%. A vote for Z is most preferable at 60%. So if a vote for Z serve mainly to take a vote from B, than it is 80%unpreferable + 20%+60% preferable which equates to 0% preferable.
on the other hand a vote for B would 60% unpreferable but 80% +40% preferable. equating to 60% preferable.
thats how i see it anyway, it maybe be a flawed logic but its a flawed system so 
:
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
|
That's a good way of looking at it: the opportunity cost of each choice. A vote for Z has a big opportunity cost - Tom would be foregoing the chance of helping B win the election. Since either A or B has to win, this opportunity cost can be viewed as actually helping A win the election.
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
Middleman
Registered: 07/11/99
Posts: 8,399
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8957173 - 09/19/08 11:38 PM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Tom should vote third party on principle, if a bunch of us did things would actually change.
A and B are basically the same anyway.
|
learningtofly
Ancient Aliens
Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 15,105
Loc: Out of this world
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: Middleman]
#8957422 - 09/20/08 01:14 AM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
With that mentality of course Z will never win. If there were many Toms who thought "well i shouldnt even try" of course there is no chance. Vote Z.
Democracy is flawed anyway because all you have to do is tell the public some bullshit about what they want to hear. Plato knew it then and we still know it now. Not everyone in a democracy has the knowledge to even vote with an informed decision. But limiting their vote because of that is somewhat elitist and also assumes that these "more informed" folk are somehow going to act in the best interest of everyone. Also, I think it's safe to assume that the more education one has (sadly this is equated with money) that the more they'd know because they have the luxury of time to read this instead of trying to put food on the table. Which would make it somewhat classist.
POLITICS IS HARD.
--------------------
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
|
Agreed, though you didn't actually justify why it's better to vote for Z.
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
learningtofly
Ancient Aliens
Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 15,105
Loc: Out of this world
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: zouden]
#8957479 - 09/20/08 01:34 AM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Because he doesn't agree with A or B so obviously it would be Z.
--------------------
|
Annapurna1
liberal pussy
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: mofo]
#8957482 - 09/20/08 01:35 AM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
mofo said:
Candidates A and B are front-runners in a virtual tie. Candidate Z is a dark horse with much less popular support. Tom is opposed to candidate A, indifferent to candidate B, and favors candidate Z. Voting for candidate B would help to work against A, however candidate B doesn't really measure up to Tom's expectations. Voting for candidate Z would fulfill Tom's preferences for a candidate, however it is virtually out of the question that candidate Z will win, and voting for Z could indirectly help A win. Who should Tom vote for?
in hindsight..the correct answer in the 2000 election was "candidate B"...
--------------------
"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
|
zouden
Neuroscientist
Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
|
Quote:
learningtofly said:
Because he doesn't agree with A or B so obviously it would be Z.
But he only agrees with Z slightly more than B, so it's not so clear cut. Should he take the long shot and go for Z, or be more pragmatic and go for B?
--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
but truth is the hardest thing to see
|
Boots
Disenchanted
Registered: 07/25/07
Posts: 1,137
Loc: Northwood, Ohio, U.S.A.
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
|
Re: Voting Ethics [Re: zouden]
#8958101 - 09/20/08 08:49 AM (15 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Tom shouldn't vote.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale 
Red Vein Kratom 
Bulk Substrate
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Octavius
ExplosiveMango
daimyo
Diploid
Malachi