confusion central
if you’re here, you are SO lost.

I have to mention this…

Yet another thing I’ve never thought about? The voting process.

 

I’ve never considered how much psychology went into voting! Voters can vote strategically, based on who they think will win even if that candidate is not their first choice…or they can vote sincerely based on their values, facing the facts that their candidate probably won’t win and their vote may actually contribute to the victory of their least favorite candidate.

 

Things like the Condorcet method, the Borda count, and instant run-off elections are essential for informed voters to know about.

Where would you expect to hear an “impossibility theorem” or an “uncertainty principle?” You definitely wouldn’t expect these things to have anything to do with the voting process….

 

This is worth half an hour!

 

http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/VotingFreeLecture.aspx?ai=32018&WT.mc_id=FLSNI20081103&ev=s

Advertisements

4 Responses to “I have to mention this…”

  1. Wow. Never knew there was so much math involved in voting.. AUGH! That lecture totally messed up my brain! There’s no “fair” way to vote… It just blows my mind. Thanks for posting!

  2. Hmm, very interesting.

  3. Did you watch the lecture, HM? It’s just…wow. The teacher is ::great:: and he makes it so interesting! But yes, Devlin, it really does boggle the brain. 🙂 I watched it and had a similar reaction. Isn’t it great?? Math, psychology, philosophy and practical politics all converge! Lol. I’m glad I’m not the only one who watched it and freaked out. 😀

  4. yes, indeed. it is very interesting. several things are taken into account in the process in the states, for sure. the truth of it is, there is far more psychology involved than you know.
    and a lot of subliminal suggestions as well.
    for instance, O comes after M in the alphabet (at least last i checked) but despite the fact that most often voter options in an election – political or otherwise – are listed alphabetically to deter favoritism, Obama was listed first in almost every single published article concerning the candidates. Obama was front page, McCain next, etc.
    examples like this abound.
    secondly, the entire system is messed up. McCain would not have been my first choice of President either, but surely between the two, we would choose one who at least has experience. brings me to think that the nation really only has two choices, but they are not necessarily the men we would choose. anyone who WANTS the job should probably be automatically thrown out. as it is, only certain men of certain wealth and certain views (usually extremest views) are even up for picks. no one middle ground. like McCain, the candidate is usually so traditional as to deter any incumbent votes and is viewed by the nation as a dinosaur (i dont think he is a dinosaur) or so open minded, like President-elect Obama, as to one’s brain falling out.
    We dont actually have a choice anymore. The parties choose for us. since when is that “choice?”
    okay, im leaving a way-too-long response and going off on tangents….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: