The vote is rigged!!

higgmond · October 25, 2016, 7:10pm

I have a hard time believing it would be efficient for the federal government to administer every single election in the country. The defense department can’t even keep track of which members of the military are eligible fore re-enlistment bonuses, but you expect them to keep track of which referenda should go on my ballot and who is running for tax collector and dog catcher in every municipality in the country?

higgmond · October 25, 2016, 7:11pm

In other words, you don’t know.

system · October 25, 2016, 7:16pm

Need I say more?

bchad · October 25, 2016, 7:21pm

I don’t think that the data needs to be consolidated at the federal level. In any case, it is the states that manage the election process, not the federal government, so electoral data consolidaton would need to be done at the state level, barring some constitutional change.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons for the Electoral College - it is a way of aggregating results managed by separate state-managed election processes into the only elected official that is to represent the entire United States. Otherwise the framers would have had to have had a federal agency managing the presidential election separately or they would have had to have had a federal agency managing all elections, which has its own set of issues that they decided to avoid in favor of a more decentralized electing process.

I’m just saying that making it easier to register to vote would have some efficiency advantages, and that data consolidation by the people who manage elections can be a part of modernizing the elections process (perhaps with some data standard coordination by the federal government - though I’m not convinced how much would be either necessary or good).

higgmond · October 25, 2016, 7:21pm

Yes, you do. Despite being someone who is proud of “not seeing any problems, only solutions”, you’ve failed to offer a viable solution. So until you offer a viable solution, you need to say more.

bchad · October 25, 2016, 7:22pm

You think arguing has no value because you assume you are infallible: if you thought it, it must be true.

Unfortunately for you, all of us can see that you are quite fallible; I admit that watching it can be entertaining.

This is not an argument. It’s just the truth.

higgmond · October 25, 2016, 7:26pm

bchad:

higgmond:

bchad:

All you are arguing for is a consolidation of data. That is not a bad thing in terms of efficiency,

I have a hard time believing it would be efficient for the federal government to administer every single election in the country. The defense department can’t even keep track of which members of the military are eligible fore re-enlistment bonuses, but you expect them to keep track of which referenda should go on my ballot and who is running for tax collector and dog catcher in every municipality in the country?

I don’t think that the data needs to be consolidated at the federal level. In any case, it is the states that manage the election process, not the federal government, so electoral data consolidaton would need to be done at the state level, barring some constitutional change.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons for the Electoral College - it is a way of aggregating results managed by separate state-managed election processes into the only elected official that is to represent the entire United States. Otherwise the framers would have had to have had a federal agency managing the presidential election separately or they would have had to have had a federal agency managing all elections, which has its own set of issues that they decided to avoid in favor of a more decentralized electing process.

I’m just saying that making it easier to register to vote would have some efficiency advantages, and that data consolidation by the people who manage elections (perhaps with some data standard coordination by the federal government - though I’m not convinced how much would be either necessary or good).

I know I unfairly tied you to PA’s central database, but registering to vote is already incredibly easy.

bchad · October 25, 2016, 7:34pm

I don’t disagree. Centralized databases of voters are not my battle cry.

Greenman72 · October 25, 2016, 7:37pm

I’m gonna disagree with you on this one, HIggs.

system · October 25, 2016, 7:42pm

Americans never make it to stage two (solving the problem), too busy arguing there is no problem, or that no solution could address every irrelevant detail.

Americans are always saying how “our arguing makes us stronger”, but not really, they never solve anything because they are too busy arguing. Which makes them weaker.

higgmond · October 25, 2016, 8:04pm

Luckily for us, we have you to make it to stage 2 for us. Your stage 2 solution, however, fails to address the very relevant detail of people having multiple residences. Take my parents as a real example. They own properties in NJ, SC and FL. None are investment properties and they spend time in all over them over the course of the year. They don’t have enough deductions to need to itemize when they do their taxes, so they don’t have to declare any of the residences as their primary residence for federal income tax purposes. My father gave up his driver’s license several years ago. Where would your federal database have him vote?

system · October 25, 2016, 9:28pm

Nope, there is no public consensus that there is a problem, nor an accurate description of the problem. Therefore no serious funding or work by the smarties has begun. I have only done around 5 minutes on the solution, and will do no more, because I am not paid.

Stage 1 first, then stage 2. Americans can’t progress to stage two, or even stage one, because they value arguing more than solving…if they solved, they wouldn’t have anything to argue about. Really they would need to reorder their values as “stage 0”. Then maybe they could get somewhere.

S2000magician · October 26, 2016, 1:34am

It’s more like his void.

S2000magician · October 26, 2016, 1:40am

Don’t you ever tire of making absurd generalizations?

system · October 26, 2016, 2:23am

When is the last time Americans solved any of their problems?

bchad · October 26, 2016, 3:33am

Probably when we got purealpha to move to Korea.

system · October 26, 2016, 3:53am

That’s called braindrain, it’s a leading indicator. You can’t solve your problems, when the problem solvers walk away.

Braindrain: the emigration of highly trained or intelligent people from a particular country

hpracing007 · October 26, 2016, 3:59am

Speaking of draining… Trump is going to drain the swamp in Washington D.C.! We all must vote for Trump!

CFABLACKBELT · October 26, 2016, 4:15am

So I finally caught up with South Park for S20. It all makes sense now. PA is really just some middle-aged Jewish guy. Well played PA, well played…

http://southpark.cc.com/clips/vz1rs6/skankhunt42-gets-to-work

higgmond · October 26, 2016, 1:22pm

purealpha:

higgmond:

purealpha:

First , a group of humans need to realize there is a problem and accurately define it (the Trumpers have not done this, because they lack basic reasoning skills). Second comes putting the smart people in the room and fixing it.

Luckily for us, we have you to make it to stage 2 for us. Your stage 2 solution, however, fails to address the very relevant detail of people having multiple residences.

Nope, there is no public consensus that there is a problem, nor an accurate description of the problem. Therefore no serious funding or work by the smarties has begun. I have only done around 5 minutes on the solution, and will do no more, because I am not paid.

Stage 1 first, then stage 2. Americans can’t progress to stage two, or even stage one, because they value arguing more than solving…if they solved, they wouldn’t have anything to argue about. Really they would need to reorder their values as “stage 0”. Then maybe they could get somewhere.

As you don’t see problems, only solutions, you should have been able to do it in 2 minutes. #PAEpicFail