[pilowsky]

To find out where you stand (politically) on the Australian spectrum try vote compass.
It appears that the Australian conservatives have moved more to the right since last time.
For orientation (approximately):
Morrison=Trump
Albanese=Biden
Bandt=Stein

[thepossum]

pilowsky, on 2022-April-09, 19:19, said:

To find out where you stand (politically) on the Australian spectrum try vote compass.
It appears that the Australian conservatives have moved more to the right since last time.
For orientation (approximately):
Morrison=Trump
Albanese=Biden
Bandt=Stein

It's wonderful analytics. Asks your views on all these issues then asks who you vote for and gives you a prediction - impressively accurate

I do have concerns trying to align anything in Australia with USA though

[PassedOut]

Looks like Russia is really angry with President Biden: Russia Airs Its Ultimate ‘Revenge Plan’ for America

Quote

The time is coming “to again help our partner Trump to become president,” state TV host Evgeny Popov recently declared. On Thursday’s edition of the state television show The Evening With Vladimir Soloviev, Putin’s pet pundits offered an update on plans for 2024.

“We’re trying to feel our way, figuring out the first steps. What can we do in 2023, 2024?,” Russian “Americanist” Malek Dudakov, a political scientist specializing in the U.S., said. He suggested that Russia’s interference in the upcoming elections is still in its early stages, and that more will be accomplished after the war is over and frosty relations between the U.S. and Russia start to warm up. “When things thaw out and the presidential race for 2024 is firmly on the agenda, there’ll be moments we can use,” he added. “The most banal approach I can think of is to invite Trump—before he announces he’s running for President—to some future summit in liberated Mariupol.”

Dmitry Drobnitsky, an omnipresent “Americanist” on Soloviev’s show, suggested that Tulsi Gabbard should be invited along with Trump. Dudakov agreed: “Tulsi Gabbard would also be great. Maybe Trump will take her as his vice-president?” Gabbard has recently become a fixture of state television for her pro-Russian talking points, and has even been described as a “Russian agent” by the Kremlin’s propaganda machine.

If state television is any indication, the real agenda of the Kremlin’s operatives was never limited to boosting any particular candidates, but rather aimed to harm America as a whole. Dudakov stressed: “With Europe, economic wars should take priority. With America, we should be working to amplify the divisions and—in light of our limited abilities—to deepen the polarization of American society.”

Clearly many republican politicians and the right-wing media are working hard to help Russia succeed.

[Winstonm]

PassedOut, on 2022-April-11, 14:33, said:

Looks like Russia is really angry with President Biden: Russia Airs Its Ultimate ‘Revenge Plan’ for America


Clearly many republican politicians and the right-wing media are working hard to help Russia succeed.

I don’t grasp why someone like Bannon wants to destroy the American government-with what would he replace it?

[johnu]

PassedOut, on 2022-April-11, 14:33, said:

Looks like Russia is really angry with President Biden: Russia Airs Its Ultimate ‘Revenge Plan’ for America


Clearly many republican politicians and the right-wing media are working hard to help Russia succeed.

This is old news. Russia already helped its Manchurian President get elected in 2016, and tried again in 2020. Fortunately for the US, the Manchurian President was not able to completely destroy America in 4 years although he tried his best. Lucky for America that Trump is a lousy businessman and a lousy president or he would have done more damage.

[Winstonm]

I get so sick and tired of our lame news media and its stenographer as reporters. Let's try to get this straight - I'm looking at you, NYT - seditionist Ali Alexander is NOT cooperating with the investigation; he is complying to a subpoena. If you don't know the difference, go back to journalism school.

[barmar]

Winstonm, on 2022-April-12, 17:24, said:

I get so sick and tired of our lame news media and its stenographer as reporters. Let's try to get this straight - I'm looking at you, NYT - seditionist Ali Alexander is NOT cooperating with the investigation; he is complying to a subpoena. If you don't know the difference, go back to journalism school.

Considering all the Trumpists who've defied congressional subpoenas, complying is cooperation.

[Winstonm]

barmar, on 2022-April-12, 17:58, said:

Considering all the Trumpists who've defied congressional subpoenas, complying is cooperation.

An Oath Keeper has no grounds not to comply, so no, that is not cooperation.

[pilowsky]

Gilbert Gottfried died yesterday - not many people get to call Donald Trump mein Fuhrer to his face.

[y66]

Jonathan Bernstein said:

https://www.bloomber...author_18529680

I haven’t yet read the new book from E.J. Dionne Jr. and Miles Rapoport arguing for universal — “mandatory” — voting in the U.S., but based on how Mark Z. Barabak at the Los Angeles Times describes the proposal, I’m a bit more swayed than I usually have been.

Let’s get the obvious objections out of the way. I thoroughly agree with the authors, and the scholars they consulted, that mandatory voting is constitutional. Especially since they call for several options for those who would prefer to opt out: A “none of the above” line on the ballot for those who don’t like any candidate; some sort of accommodation for those who feel compelled to abstain based on religious practices; and, for those who still wouldn’t comply, minimal fines. Feel free to argue that compulsory voting under those conditions is an unjustified infringement on one’s liberties, but there’s simply no strong case that it’s unconstitutional.

And, no, universal voting isn’t just a partisan plot to benefit Democrats. Or Republicans. Or anyone else. Political scientists have repeatedly found minimal differences between voters and non-voters. Moreover, one of the few really positive developments over the last 20 years or so is that after a brief period in which virtually all the groups most likely to vote tended towards Republican and all those least likely to vote tended toward Democrat, things have returned to normal. Fifteen years ago, it was common for people to speculate that Democrats had real, continuing disadvantages in midterm elections because low overall turnout inevitably helped Republicans. Not anymore. If Democrats are clobbered this November, it’ll be for a normal democratic reason: It’s a midterm with an unpopular Democrat in the White House.

The best argument for universal voting has always been that it encourages participation in democracy, thereby generating additional buy-in among the broadest possible group of citizens to the whole idea of a democratic polity. But Dionne and Rapoport add more. The one that strikes me as pretty strong is the idea that universal voting would immediately mark the end of the voting wars, with one party fighting for ways to make (voluntary) voting easier and the other pushing to make it harder. If voting is optional, then both parties have an incentive to set rules that they believe help them; mandatory voting would end all that.

I’m less impressed by the case that eliminating turnout as a key election variable would reduce the poisonous effects of negative partisanship, in which voters tend to hate the other party even more than they like their own. Negative partisanship could still be wielded in nomination contests, and therefore by politicians who anticipate future nomination contests; a member of the House, that is, could still try to build a name for her future Senate run by bashing the other party. And that’s before the incentives created by the conservative marketplace (and the smaller, less important liberal marketplace).

I’m not even sure that the electorate should necessarily represent all citizens, at least if voting is made sufficiently easy and any remaining restrictions apply equally to all voters. As long as every citizen finds it as easy to vote as every other citizen, I’m not sure that — at least theoretically — there’s anything wrong with those who bother to participate voluntarily shouldn’t have more say than those who voluntarily opt out. Indeed, those who do more than just vote already have more influence than those who vote but do nothing else, and we’re pretty much OK with that, with the exception for some people of financial contributions. That is, no one believes that hours working as a volunteer should be capped — or that all citizens should be forced to write three letters for elected officials or spend 20 hours per election phone-banking for their party. It’s not immediately clear to me why voting should be different.

On balance, I’m not entirely sold. Besides, my own favorite reform proposal that is unlikely to be adopted and wouldn’t have much if any effect on electoral outcomes is lowering the voting age by four or five or six years, and I’m not sure if it makes sense to adopt a second such idea. But I tend to believe that thinking through these proposals is a healthy exercise anyway that reminds us of — or educates us for the first time about — what we really value about democracy. And that is good for the republic. So kudos to Dionne and Rapoport for pushing the idea, even if I’m not quite ready to support it.

[pilowsky]

You don't need a new book. You just need to look at Australia.
Compulsory voting with an exhaustive preferential system is the best way to run a democracy hands down.
It won't work in the USA because of the very long tradition of trying to block large sections of the population from voting.
The USA needs to get rid of systemic racism as step 1.
Then it can consider moving towards being a democracy.
I won't hold my breath.

[akwoo]

How does Australia handle voting for those folks who live deep in the bush, scores of kilometers (an exaggeration) from anyone else?

[pilowsky]

akwoo, on 2022-April-14, 22:40, said:

How does Australia handle voting for those folks who live deep in the bush, scores of kilometers (an exaggeration) from anyone else?

If you are over 18 and don't vote you get a $20.00 fine (roughly 4-5 coffees in Australia).
This applies to all local, state and federal government.

Of course, there is no compulsion to actually vote, but you do have to turn up - collect your ballot and put it in the box.
At every election about 6% of votes are informal (filled out incorrectly and therefore not countable) - you can read the exhaustive analysis here.

Australians love voting. It's a national sport.
You can vote early, you can vote on the day, you can post your vote from the outer Hebrides or Mawson base but if you don't, its 20 big ones.

Australia has been polluted by many americanisms but fortunately not 'folks'.
Unfortunately we now have influencers, tiktokers and shops that tell you to have a nice day.
Things can be monetised and be impactful and there's definitely too much lycra about.

[thepossum]

pilowsky, on 2022-April-15, 02:15, said:

If you are over 18 and don't vote you get a $20.00 fine (roughly 4-5 coffees in Australia).
This applies to all local, state and federal government.

Of course, there is no compulsion to actually vote, but you do have to turn up - collect your ballot and put it in the box.
At every election about 6% of votes are informal (filled out incorrectly and therefore not countable) - you can read the exhaustive analysis here.

Australians love voting. It's a national sport.
You can vote early, you can vote on the day, you can post your vote from the outer Hebrides or Mawson base but if you don't, its 20 big ones.

Australia has been polluted by many americanisms but fortunately not 'folks'.
Unfortunately we now have influencers, tiktokers and shops that tell you to have a nice day.
Things can be monetised and be impactful and there's definitely too much lycra about.

I like and respect many of the aspects of compulsory showing up (or at least posting) whatever you put on your ballot - as half the informals demonstrate, they enjoy telling politicians what they think. Sadly the other informals demonstrate how complex the process still can be for some. Also, out of all the formal votes who seem to follow the instructions accurately I suspect many/most still couldn't explain the voting system to you

I prefer optional preferences to compulsory though. Why should you be forced to transfer your vote to someone you despise or risk your vote not counting?

Another area, which I at least find interesting, is that of the donkey vote - where people protest formally. There have been studies (by Sydney researchers I believe) where they estimate up to 2% of any vote is one or other of the many forms of formal donkey/protest vote. Its interesting for analysing very marginal seats

One thing that upset me was when the big parties removed a wonderful aspect of chance whereby some random nobody could win a senate seat by default. I actually approved of random nobodies getting in from time to time

I think I can agree on the lycra issue too

[Winstonm]

pilowsky, on 2022-April-15, 02:15, said:

If you are over 18 and don't vote you get a $20.00 fine (roughly 4-5 coffees in Australia).
This applies to all local, state and federal government.

Of course, there is no compulsion to actually vote, but you do have to turn up - collect your ballot and put it in the box.
At every election about 6% of votes are informal (filled out incorrectly and therefore not countable) - you can read the exhaustive analysis here.

Australians love voting. It's a national sport.
You can vote early, you can vote on the day, you can post your vote from the outer Hebrides or Mawson base but if you don't, its 20 big ones.

Australia has been polluted by many americanisms but fortunately not 'folks'.
Unfortunately we now have influencers, tiktokers and shops that tell you to have a nice day.
Things can be monetised and be impactful and there's definitely too much lycra about.

Voting in the U.S. is ridiculous. Not only is it done during the week when people have to work but we can't get a law passed even to make those Tuesdays a national holiday - capitalism trumps democracy here.

And you see what happens when the unfettered free market picks the president: his name was Trump.

[johnu]

Winstonm, on 2022-April-15, 11:20, said:

Voting in the U.S. is ridiculous. Not only is it done during the week when people have to work but we can't get a law passed even to make that Tuesdays a national holiday - capitalism trumps democracy here.

Actually, there is no need for a voting day holiday. The US should have national vote by mail laws. Many states already have vote by mail legislation that allows anybody to vote by mail and mail-in ballots are sent to every registered voter. If you don't have a mail in ballot when you are trying to vote, you can go to some government locations to vote in person. All voters need to do is fill out a ballot, and drop it off at a mailbox sometime before election day. Nobody waits in line for hours, or half a day, or an entire day.

[johnu]

pilowsky, on 2022-April-14, 16:22, said:

You don't need a new book. You just need to look at Australia.

I read on the internet that Australia doesn't exist and somebody just made it up. What proof do you have that it exists?

[pilowsky]

johnu, on 2022-April-15, 21:12, said:

I read on the internet that Australia doesn't exist and somebody just made it up. What proof do you have that it exists?

Where do you think the space lasers are kept?

[Winstonm]

pilowsky, on 2022-April-15, 22:04, said:

Where do you think the space lasers are kept?

I thought Australia escaped from a Chinese lab.

[pilowsky]

Winstonm, on 2022-April-16, 07:12, said:

I thought Australia escaped from a Chinese lab.

True. We use the space lasers that we brought with us from the lab to shoot the viruses on our way to the polling booth.