[ back to Tom 7 Radar ]

w
e
b

l
i
n
k
Vote No-der (23 Feb 2004 at 15:05)
Although I enocuraged you to Vote for Nader back in 2000, I have to say that I've learned my lesson, now. I didn't think we could have a president as bad as this.

Listen, with our crazy voting system, you have to game it: your best vote is not always for your favorite candidate. That's a little sad because (a) people are not always rational, (b) voting strategy is harder work than just picking your favorite candidate and (c) Nader is running again this year.

But maybe this suicide run is part of his grand genius plan for election reform. If he spoils the election for the democrats again, perhaps they will be hurt enough to push for some modernized (and mathematically non-gameable) voting system. (Check out electionmethods.org for some arguments for the Condorcet system ("automatic runoff") and even simpler Approval system.) Under either, citizens could vote their conscience and not worry that "a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush."

(Of course a vote for Nader is not actually a vote for Bush, it's more like a vote for nobody, or else half a vote for Bush. When you vote for Bush instead of Bush's major opponent, you raise the difference between them by two votes, not one.)

In the meantime, I will be voting with strategy. Let's just hope that some good comes of this!

By the way, it is still true that non-voters are the majority.
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
Adam (lynx.auton.cs.cmu.edu) – 02.23.04 19:37:15
So... what is your recommended strategy, and why is it useful?
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
Tom 7 (h-66-167-161-198.phlapafg.dynamic.covad.net) – 02.23.04 20:44:13
Nothing special: Just vote for the candidate who is most likely to unseat Bush.
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
Tuuur (to061130.mobiel.utwente.nl) – 02.24.04 05:12:20
"By the way, it is still true that non-voters are the majority."

I think the non-voters should be taken into account.
When the majority does not vote, it means the candidates are not acceptible, hence a re-vote.
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
Tom 7 (h-66-167-161-198.phlapafg.dynamic.covad.net) – 02.24.04 09:42:32
It has a certain charm to it, doesn't it? (I think Nader has proposed that, too!) But I don't think you can make Americans vote by just giving them better candidates. Having the feeling that your vote can matter can do it, though.
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
MrBawn (ac801094.ipt.aol.com) – 02.24.04 14:44:49
You know, you could easily sell condorcet to the general public by telling them it's just like American Idol...
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
Andrew (yale128036074100.student.yale.edu) – 03.21.04 22:58:19
People in non-swing states can still vote for Nader instead of Kerry without worrying much about kickin' it to Bush.
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
Tom 7 (h-66-167-9-177.phlapafg.dynamic.covad.net) – 03.21.04 23:55:17
True, but what's the point of voting in non-swing states? If it's to influence the popular vote, then it still matters. If it doesn't matter, then, well, it doesn't matter.

Anyway, PA has the dubious honor of being such a "swing" state...
p
o
s
t

a

c
o
m
m
e
n
t
[ Tom 7 Radar  •  Tom 7 on Google+  •  on Twitter  •  on Facebook ]