Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

Then put your voter registration where it matters. Switch your voter registration to Republican and vote for Ron Paul in the primary, and get as many other anti-war democrats to do the same as you can. He is the only republican candidate who will flat out end the war, something neither Barak Obama nor Hillary Clinton would even do.

What have you got to lose? You can switch back after the primaries and vote democrat in the general election. It's not like you'll be missing anything in the Democratic primary; is there any difference between Hillary Obama and Barak Clinton? They're both racing to out-socialist each other, as are the rest of the democrats. Not to mention that Ron Paul guy is a kook, right? He should be a cakewalk to beat in the general election. Hence it is your commie red DUTY to switch your voter registration to republican and vote for Ron Paul in the primaries.

And before you ask, just because I'm not going to waste my time voting does not make it a waste of time to convince a lot of you chumps to waste YOUR time voting. Besides, if you believe in the magic of voting, my disbelief is irrelevant.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

I was about to say this is the most convincing post Boro has ever made. However, I don't think you should call those who you want to do something for you chumps.

Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

Open primaries FTW.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

I mean chumps in the nicest way. Some of my best friends are chumps.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

Why complain if you don't plan on voting... everyone knows how difficult it is to make progress using "the system" but I don't think there is anything less productive then just giving up..

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why complain if you don't plan on voting... everyone knows how difficult it is to make progress using "the system" but I don't think there is anything less productive then just giving up..

[/ QUOTE ]

We're not having this argument again. Just tell all your commie friends to register R and vote Ron Paul, mmmk?

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

I've never had this argument with you sir, and I don't expect to. I just wonder if it is boring being so convinced you are right...

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've never had this argument with you sir, and I don't expect to. I just wonder if it is boring being so convinced you are right...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, the "we" indicated we on the forum. We've had the argument about the futility of voting many, many, many times.

And no, it is not boring being right.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was about to say this is the most convincing post Boro has ever made. However, I don't think you should call those who you want to do something for you chumps.

Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]
Iron, why is Hillary>Edwards? At least Edwards acknowledged that voting for the Iraq war was a mistake.

I know it would be awesome to have Bill be the ambassador to the world or whatever it is, but isn't Hillary rather conservative?

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

I accept your apology.

Also, I'm not a communist, and I will not vote in either primary because I am registered as an independent.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

"And no, it is not boring being right."

Nor is it boring being left.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

Lol at thinking Ron Paul could end the war. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Lol at thinking Ron Paul could end the war. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

As Commander in Chief?

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lol at thinking Ron Paul could end the war. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

As Commander in Chief?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

Great Post. I give it the official Zeno's World Domination Enterprises, Inc., Seal of Approval.

[ QUOTE ]
Hence it is your commie red DUTY to switch your voter registration to republican and vote for Ron Paul in the primaries.


[/ QUOTE ]

Commies (and other Looney lefties) have large blinders and can only run in a single groove down the racetrack - it's very hard to get them to switch lanes or even look around.

In the interest of Democracy and the American Way, I hereby officially offer $100 to Andy Fox to vote for Ron Paul in the primary. Honest Open Bribery is Good. Trying to disguise your bribery under the guise of the common good (Hillary, Obama etc) and other such sly nonsense is cheap and dishonest bribery.

There is nothing wrong with buying votes; in fact, years ago I made a post in this very forum about the benefits of such a system.

-Zeno

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

"I hereby officially offer $100 to Andy Fox to vote for Ron Paul in the primary."

Hmm . . .

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

I'm pretty sure that's a felony.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Then put your voter registration where it matters. Switch your voter registration to Republican and vote for Ron Paul in the primary,

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have voted but some guys convinced me on a politics forum that voting changes nothing and is pointless. They made some strong arguments and used math and everything.

I could PM the link of the forum debate and you could argue the point directly to the forum, but watch out for this guy called Borodog, he will probably tell you you are being illogical and an idiot for arguing in favour of voting.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

What about if I give you half? (Then it's probably just a misdemeanor.)

California used to have a system where a candidate could be on the primary ballot for any and all politicial parties. In 1946, Earl Warren won both the Democratic and Republican Parties' nominations for governor.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Then put your voter registration where it matters. Switch your voter registration to Republican and vote for Ron Paul in the primary,

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have voted but some guys convinced me on a politics forum that voting changes nothing and is pointless. They made some strong arguments and used math and everything.

I could PM the link of the forum debate and you could argue the point directly to the forum, but watch out for this guy called Borodog, he will probably tell you you are being illogical and an idiot for arguing in favour of voting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, but I am not arguing in favor of personally voting. I am arguing that if a bunch of people are going to waste their time voting anyway, it is not a waste of time to try to convince them to vote the way you want.

Voting is foolish; lobbying the fools is not (necessarily).

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

I don't follow. If voting is a waste of time, what difference does it make how anybody votes?

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ah, but I am not arguing in favor of personally voting. I am arguing that if a bunch of people are going to waste their time voting anyway, it is not a waste of time to try to convince them to vote the way you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

By using your time to convince others to behave a certain way, aren't you contradicting the bolded? Surely it's not a waste of their time if you're spending your time to get them to change their voting behavior by starting this thread, right?

If it was a waste of their time to vote (where 'their' = readers of this forum), then we could deduce that you would be wasting your time "lobbying" them.

Edit: What andyfox said

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
By using your time to convince others to behave a certain way, aren't you contradicting the bolded? Surely it's not a waste of their time if you're spending your time to get them to change their voting behavior by starting this thread, right?

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess its an EV calculation. Say Borodog spent 10 minutes thinking of that post and writing it out, but it would take 30 minutes for him to actually go to the polls. If Borodog thinks that he will change an average of .33 votes to get Ron Paul elected, it is better for him to make the post.

This doesn't make it worthwhile unless you account for how much utility Borodog will gain by influencing voters. I have no idea how to account for this.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't follow. If voting is a waste of time, what difference does it make how anybody votes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Voting is a waste of time because of the unlikelihood of one vote deciding the election. Convincing a large block of voters has a greater chance of effecting the election there fore if a person can increase his votes altered to time ratio he may arrive at a point where his efforts will bring about a situation that he deems worthwhile.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess its an EV calculation. Say Borodog spent 10 minutes thinking of that post and writing it out, but it would take 30 minutes for him to actually go to the polls. If Borodog thinks that he will change an average of .33 votes to get Ron Paul elected, it is better for him to make the post.


[/ QUOTE ]

If Boro is claiming that others are wasting their time by voting:

[ QUOTE ]
I am arguing that if a bunch of people are going to waste their time voting anyway

[/ QUOTE ]

...then trying to influence their behavior is still a negative EV move. In other words, a losing play is a losing play.

In the end, by conceding there's value in trying to change voter behavior, I think Boro is conceding there's value in voting. I don't see a way around deducing this.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't follow. If voting is a waste of time, what difference does it make how anybody votes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Voting is a waste of time because of the unlikelihood of one vote deciding the election. Convincing a large block of voters has a greater chance of effecting the election there fore if a person can increase his votes altered to time ratio he may arrive at a point where his efforts will bring about a situation that he deems worthwhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, by conceding this, you're conceding that voting produces worthwhile consequences. How can we come to any other conclusion?

I don't see how we can claim "X is a time wasting activity" out of one-side of our mouths, but then out of the other say "convincing other people to engage in time wasting activity X will be productive". If Activity X is time wasting, nothing productive can come of it, by definition, unless "time wasting" has some new meaning I'm not aware of.

Maybe this is one big false dichotomy, but I'm not seeing the alternatives here.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]


If Boro is claiming that others are wasting their time by voting:

Quote:
I am arguing that if a bunch of people are going to waste their time voting anyway



...then trying to influence their behavior is still a negative EV move. In other words, a losing play is a losing play.

[/ QUOTE ]


Wrong. Borodog doesn't lose when a person votes ineffectively, it doesn't cost him his time for another person to vote. much like if i sell TVs for less than it costs me to buy them it doesn't mean its a - ev play for you to buy one from me. You can gain from my loss, no problem.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


If Boro is claiming that others are wasting their time by voting:

Quote:
I am arguing that if a bunch of people are going to waste their time voting anyway



...then trying to influence their behavior is still a negative EV move. In other words, a losing play is a losing play.

[/ QUOTE ]


Wrong. Borodog doesn't lose when a person votes ineffectively

[/ QUOTE ]

Conversely, by claiming voting is a waste of time, Boro doesn't gain when a person votes effectively. That's what would make a waste of time. If he's not gaining or losing anything, then he's wasting his time trying to change voting behavior.

Unless he does gain or lose when someone votes effectively or ineffectively. Then voting is a productive use of someone's time, because it produces gains and losses -- which contradicts the claim that voting is a waste of one's time.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Conversely, by claiming voting is a waste of time, Boro doesn't gain when a person votes effectively. That's what would make a waste of time. If he's not gaining or losing anything, then he's wasting his time trying to change voting behavior.

Unless he does gain or lose when someone votes effectively or ineffectively. Then voting is a productive use of someone's time, because it produces gains and losses -- which contradicts the claim that voting is a waste of one's time.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think what boro might be saying is "don't play hand X pre-flop, but if you insist on playing it, at least minimize your losses on later streets by doing Y."

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Conversely, by claiming voting is a waste of time, Boro doesn't gain when a person votes effectively

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF are you babbling about now? All borodog was claiming that the chances of altering an election with a single vote in a way that benefits you was very unlikley. Since it takes some finite amount of time to vote, and there are finite benfits to be gained a person could figure out if it was worth their time to vote or not. Once you realize that the denominator (chances of effecting the vote * amount of effort voting) is so large you know that your expected gain from altering the vote would have to also be massive to make it worthwhile.

[ QUOTE ]
Then voting is a productive use of someone's time, because it produces gains and losses -- which contradicts the claim that voting is a waste of one's time.


[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that it produces losses does not contradict that its a waste of ones time, it confirms it. However a third party can gain from my loss, without it having been turned into a gain for me.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

If everyone who thought it wouldn't matter actually voted, there would at least be sufficient numbers added to the canidates you people support, perhaps getting some of their policies adopted by main stream canidates. I do not see a major loss to taking a half hour to vote.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]

That and because he deserves it since he's black, yes?

You'll never be allowed to forget that line until I'm banned.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]

That and because he deserves it since he's black, yes?

You'll never be allowed to forget that line until I'm banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lol, what did Iron say this before? Link?

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]

That and because he deserves it since he's black, yes?

You'll never be allowed to forget that line until I'm banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lol, what did Iron say this before? Link?

[/ QUOTE ]

Iron really has said this before. Link.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]

That and because he deserves it since he's black, yes?

You'll never be allowed to forget that line until I'm banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't exactly what I said, but feel free to read the link. I stand by the post.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And before you ask, just because I'm not going to waste my time voting does not make it a waste of time to convince a lot of you chumps to waste YOUR time voting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, while technically true since the numerator and denominator change, you're probably wrong in this case. You aren't MLK. The number of votes you'll change from the OP and responding to this thread will probably equal 0. Changing registration, then rechanging, because some dude who called you a chump on the interwebs said so? And you wasted all this time...

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]

That and because he deserves it since he's black, yes?

You'll never be allowed to forget that line until I'm banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't exactly what I said, but feel free to read the link. I stand by the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

From my memory, at least two posts are missing. Worked for the Soviets, works here too. I'm sure there's some loophole where if you call a racist a racist you'll see your post become a non-post.

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that's a felony.

[/ QUOTE ]


In washington state It's aganist the law it is only a gross misdemeanor (I assume this is for state elections) see my quote below:

"RCW 29.85.090 states "Any person who solicits, requests, or demands, directly or indirectly, any reward or thing of value or the promise thereof in exchange for his or her vote or in exchange for the vote of any other person for or against any candidate or for or against any ballot measure to be voted upon at a primary or special or general election is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable to the same extent as a gross misdemeanor that is punishable under RCW 9A.20.021."

Gross misdemeanors "shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a maximum term fixed by the court of not more than one year, or by a fine in an amount fixed by the court of not more than five thousand dollars, or by both such imprisonment and fine."

Then there is this interesting information On Line Selling

"The Chicago Board of Election Commissioners is planning to file a lawsuit Monday against Vote-auction.com, a Web site that enables people to put their presidential votes up for bid, after discovering that 1,131 Illinois residents were participating in that questionable practice."

"They're violating the law," says Thomas Leach, a spokesman with the election board. "The fact is that they're promoting vote fraud. It's a federal and state felony to buy or sell votes, or to offer to buy or sell votes."



"The site says it has 15,128 people who have put their votes up for bid. The total bid price currently comes to $170,600. California's votes appear to be the most valuable, selling for $19.61 per vote. Votes from Louisiana are the least valuable, selling for $3.57 each."


Some historical perspective: Back in the Day...

"Money has been associated with elections since the inception of the electoral process in the United States. Out of four million citizens during the Revolution, only 800,000 property owners were enfranchised. In 1777 James Madison lost a race for the Virginia legislature, which he claimed was due to his refusal to provide alcohol. Aaron Burr persuaded the New York state assembly to create an anti-Federalist state bank for the purpose of helping citizens buy land in order to gain votes.

By the time of the presidential election of 1828, 22 two of the 24 states chose presidential electors through the popular vote and most had abandoned the property requirement. Some politicians had been known to buy votes and pay repeat voters. In 1823 the price of a vote in New York City was $5 and for repeat voters, went as high as $30."


------------------------------------------------

$5 in 1823 translates to $73.04 in 2006 dollars according to a web-based inflation calculator I found. Andy is getting good value for his vote, moneywise. Not that my offer was serious.

-Zeno

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I still plan on voting for Obama because Obama>Hillary>Edwards

[/ QUOTE ]

That and because he deserves it since he's black, yes?

You'll never be allowed to forget that line until I'm banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't exactly what I said, but feel free to read the link. I stand by my post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Iron said:

"To summarize why I made the allegedly racist remark, the reason you should vote for Obama because he is black is that I think it would advance race relations in this country for people to be exposed to a smart, successful black man in the news every day. "

Bully for you Iron. Also note that Ms. Rice is a smart, successful Black Woman that is exposed in the news every day. An appointed office, but I stand by my remark, whatever it may mean.

-Zeno

Re: Democrats: Do you want the war to end?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Conversely, by claiming voting is a waste of time, Boro doesn't gain when a person votes effectively. That's what would make a waste of time. If he's not gaining or losing anything, then he's wasting his time trying to change voting behavior.

Unless he does gain or lose when someone votes effectively or ineffectively. Then voting is a productive use of someone's time, because it produces gains and losses -- which contradicts the claim that voting is a waste of one's time.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think what boro might be saying is "don't play hand X pre-flop, but if you insist on playing it, at least minimize your losses on later streets by doing Y."

[/ QUOTE ]

This analogy isn't relevant; if Boro is spending him time trying to influence how people play those later streets, then he's implicitly conceding that it's a valuable use of one's time to play those later streets.

By granting that when we're talking about voting, we're talking about a behavior that produces 'gains' and 'losses' here -- and that there are ways to minimize 'losses' -- then we're talking about behavior that can in no way be described as "a waste of time".