The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old November 6, 2012, 07:04 AM   #1
Comancheseven
Member
 
Join Date: October 5, 2012
Location: Colorado Springs CO.
Posts: 37
Get out and Vote

Today is the day, make sure you go and vote. This election may be the most important election we have faced in our lifetime. The stakes to our Freedom and our Country are too great. Vote for Freedom!

I am the NRA and I Vote.

Thanks.. Dave
Comancheseven is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 08:09 AM   #2
Pistolgripshotty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Somewhere out there
Posts: 184
I agree this election alone will impact us for the next 30 years
__________________
12 Gauge Fury!
Pistolgripshotty is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 09:17 AM   #3
Stressfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
I am the NRA and I Vote.
Cheers!

Regardless of the candidate(s) one chooses to support, however, we should all be supporting and exercising this right just as fervently as we support our 2A rights.

Now if only we can do away with this electoral college nonsense
__________________
"The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank" - Montgomery Scott
Stressfire is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 09:30 AM   #4
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,119
Quote:
Now if only we can do away with this electoral college nonsense
The electoral college is actually good, even though it's not obvious. For one thing, can you imagine if there was a national election where the outcome was a virtual tie? (Florida 2000, but the whole country) We would never finish the recount.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 09:31 AM   #5
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,343
Actually, the biggest problem with our voting system is the "All and Nothing" opinion that it forces.

I can't vote for one candidate without giving 100% of my support to that person and 0% to the others. ALL the others.

Range Voting makes far more sense. It lets the voter give an honest opinion about EVERY candidate instead of choosing "the lesser of two evils". Particularly, since there are a lot more than 2 choices, in reality.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 09:58 AM   #6
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,609
BP, the "all or nothing" trait isn't a problem -- it's a feature.

A voter's nuanced opinion of a wide range of candidates isn't the subject of an election.

I believe that two party, pick A or B, voting gives people greater policy choice than other systems that accommodate niche tastes.

The latter come in a couple of flavors. One of those would be a proportional representation parliamentary system. You end up with a few fringe party seats that are rarely consequential and several of the larger factions keeping more or less stable shares of seats over time.

The range voting you describe would only serve to delete the strength of the plurality or majority the single winning candidate would show. This would not itself lend that office holder any greater legitimacy.

In the two party format, politically active people get fairly good input at the primary level, offering people the likelihood of a simple majority victory in the post-distillation process. That's frustrating for people who don't feel included in that two party choice, but if your candidate could make it through one of the party primaries, it is exceedingly unlikely he would prevail in any kind of general election.

Just my two cents.
zukiphile is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 10:19 AM   #7
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zukiphile
BP, the "all or nothing" trait isn't a problem -- it's a feature.
I disagree.

The USA was not intended to be a 2 party political system. Unfortunately, popular vote systems encourage the reduction of choices over time by giving incentive to combine forces and gain influence until only the two remain. It doesn't take very long either. We've been saddled with the two choices that we have today since about 1820, with only a few name changes along the way. We've been forced into the least competitive system in the free world.

Forcing an "All and Nothing" vote can also cause a candidate who would LOSE to ANY of the others, if it were a two way race, to actually WIN.

Think about that. The LEAST popular choice can WIN, and it's because of the "All and Nothing" nature of of system.

Range voting takes nothing away from a truly popular candidate. That candidate will still get more support than any of the TRULY less popular opponents. What it does is give the people a COMPLETE voice and breaks the strangle-hold the two party system has on our options.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 10:50 AM   #8
mobayjd
Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2007
Posts: 35
DONE!
mobayjd is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 10:52 AM   #9
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,609
I don't know whether you've spent much time with the site in your first link. Some of its claim strike me as especially dubious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Pfleuger
The LEAST popular choice can WIN, and it's because of the "All and Nothing" nature of of system.
That isn't correct in a literal sense, since the person who gets fewer votes is categorically less popular than the one who gets more. The harm indicated in the link, that a plurality candidate would prevail, can be solved by a simple run-off in which voters make an actual choice rather than express contingent and hypothetical preferences.

"All or nothing" represents the choice made in an election so long as the winner gets "All" of the office for which he runs and the other get none of that office.

There are ways to re-jigger that in parliamentary systems, but for the reasons I noted above the result can be a sort of parliamentary trench warfare that can actually result in a narrower band of policy over time, with the range determined by the parliamentary coalition builders rather than those who elected them.

At a very practical level, we seem to have sufficient difficulty counting votes now in a simple majority, one man one vote model. I would have little hope that a system lots of voters would not understand at a conceptual level would result in the kind of clarity that would settle an election.

Last edited by zukiphile; November 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM.
zukiphile is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 10:58 AM   #10
JimPage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 627
Voted at 9:00am EST. Easy voting here (upstate NY). Mark a paper ballot, put into a scanner and the computer does the rest. Just have to trust it. I assume there is sampling taken to make sure the computer reads the ballot correctly.

I didn't see any Black Panthers, but I'm not in Philly. No Pink Panthers either.

I'll be glad when the suspense is over. Buy lots of ammo now.
__________________
Jim Page

Cogito, ergo armatum sum
JimPage is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:14 AM   #11
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,298
I have just returned from doing my civic duty (and now getting ready for work).

The Rupert Civic Center was busy... Talked to the ladies and they told me that there were folks lined up at 7am when they opened the polls. Been brisk for the last 2 hours.

This bodes well for a large turnout, at least in our county. Many first time voters and registrations, causing delays for those of us already registered. No grumbles, though.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:17 AM   #12
SIMP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 2, 2005
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 285
Our polls here in Mississippi opened at 7:00 CST. I was in and out by 7:20 which wasn't too bad.
SIMP is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:19 AM   #13
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
The USA was not intended to be a 2 party political system
Yes, and it was hoped that would never happen by the founders, but ideology quickly morphed into a party system. I'm not sure the multi-party system is any better. It is all messy and bitter, then as it is now.
jmortimer is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:30 AM   #14
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,770
Better may be to do away with the electoral vote and go with the one who has the most votes in his column wins. Simplifies things and does away with the battle ground stuff. All total I spent 1 hour from the time I hit the line until I was out the door. An hour well spent
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Range Safety Officer, IDPA Safety Officer
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 12:27 PM   #15
Comancheseven
Member
 
Join Date: October 5, 2012
Location: Colorado Springs CO.
Posts: 37
I just returned home from voting, I did my duty for my Country. Now we just have to wait to see if the majorty of the American People can see through the fog of B.S.

Dave
Comancheseven is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 12:35 PM   #16
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
Done! I must say I passed a polling station at 7 this morning that had almost every spot in the parking lot filled. In 2008 the same place was maybe 45% - 50% full at the same time of day. I dont know what to read from the parking lot tea leaves but it seems obvious theres a lot of emotion out there no matter what side your on.
__________________
Molon Labe

Last edited by BGutzman; November 6, 2012 at 11:59 PM.
BGutzman is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 05:01 PM   #17
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,051
I wish I could say the same. When I walked into my polling station, I singlehandedly doubled the turnout. The parking lot was empty but for the cars of the folks working there.

I asked if this is how it had been all day, and they said yes. The biggest "rush" was in the morning, and even then, there was no wait for the 5 ballot machines they had.

This isn't a rural small town, either. It's a major suburb of Atlanta.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 05:56 PM   #18
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
With regard to the electoral college, just had this discussion a half hour ago with a friend (a Texan).

He felt we should get rid of the electoral colllege.

I pointed out that doing so would enable candidates to ignore smaller states and small towns, and focus on LA, Chicago, NYC... So most national level decisions would bias even more toward large urban area voters.

My Texan friend now thinks maybe the electoral college is not all bad.
MLeake is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 07:01 PM   #19
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,648
Aye. The Electoral College definitely serves a purpose, even if only to get candidates campaigning more places that just the most populated cities.

10.5% of the U.S. population can be found in just 20 of the largest cities.
53% of the U.S. population can be found in just 10 states.

Link.
Link.
Link.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 07:53 PM   #20
JimPage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 627
Electoral college was designed to do that in theory, and I believe it worked for awhile. But since then (over a hundred years ago) the electoral college itself draws the same attention to the states with the most electoral votes.

The easiest way to address this issue is to make the electoral college votes from each state proportional to the votes cast for different candidates within that state. Winner takes all in any state is silly and not representative.
__________________
Jim Page

Cogito, ergo armatum sum
JimPage is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 09:38 PM   #21
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,122
Maybe so....but...

Quote:
The easiest way to address this issue is to make the electoral college votes from each state proportional to the votes cast for different candidates within that state. Winner takes all in any state is silly and not representative.
It maybe so,...BUT...it is the state's choice. There are a couple of states that do NOT use a winner take all system for electoral votes.

AND, while it is rarely done, and a little known fact, each state's electors are not bound to follow the popular vote. They can, literally, vote any damn way they please.

A perfect system? No. Could it be inproved? possibly, BUT what you or I might consider an improvement can be someone else's idea of disenfranchisement.

Our founders never intended this nation to be a pure democracy, and with good reason. Far too much emphasis is given to democracy as a good thing, in and of itself. It's not. As the old saying goes, three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner is democracy.

Our Founders recognized that all to easily, pure democracy leads to mob rule. And today, with the instant transmission of information and ideas, it is even easier than it was a couple centuries ago.

They gave us a represetative REPUBLIC, for that very reason. All we have to do is keep it.

Sadly, it's a task far easier said, than done.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 10:57 PM   #22
Andrewsmith1
Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2011
Posts: 29
I have been in the ICU since Sunday and I called the County Clerk and they made sure a Ballot was delivered to my bedside this morning.

Andrew
Andrewsmith1 is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:27 PM   #23
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,290
Hope you have stocked up....

Watching Election results ...I'm spending $$$ in the morning.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:34 PM   #24
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
We shall see. The PC "wisdom" imposed here is that it does not matter who sits in what seat and that there is no way things would get worse. I believe that we will see a huge demand for firearms, ammunition, and components like we have never seen before. I believe the federal judiciary will be "fixed" along with the SCOTUS and that executive orders will be issued that will go beyond anything ever imposed in history. I believe it does matter who sits where.
jmortimer is offline  
Old November 6, 2012, 11:54 PM   #25
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I am less concerned about legislation than about bench nominations.

Aside from bench nominations, it's hard to predict what comes next. Lame ducks often are willing to run risks they would not entertain, if they had to worry about re-election.

On the other hand, history has shown that many lame ducks were actually worried about creating a lasting legacy, and so actually moved more toward the center in their second (last) term.

So, while I'll press for legislation that supports RKBA, and push back against legislation that encroaches, I'm not going to get all worked up about election results unless something happens to make real problems seem more imminent.
MLeake is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13125 seconds with 9 queries