[EM] Cartoon about single-mark ballots

VoteFair ElectionMethods at VoteFair.org
Fri Sep 23 14:11:44 PDT 2016

On 9/23/2016 1:08 PM, Jan Kok wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:56 AM, VoteFair <ElectionMethods at votefair.org
> <mailto:ElectionMethods at votefair.org>> wrote:
>     On 9/19/2016 12:00 AM, Jan Kok wrote:
>     >  Before you publish that article, please check out VotePact.org
>     Even if two people agree to cast ballots that cancel each other out,
>     that's still leaving the decision up to the other voters in that state.

> I don't understand your point. Whether you and another person vote for
> Clinton and Trump, or make a pact and vote for Stein and/or Johnson
> instead, the election is still decided by the other voters in the state.

Dilution.  Why dilute the votes?

As an analogy, why put both sweet and sour into the same pot of soup in 
hopes of balancing them out to be neutral?

I am not opposed to your underlying desire to find a way to make things 
better.  I just cannot imagine the logistics of your approach working 
for more than a handful of people.

Another point that Robert Bristow-Johnson points out: vote trading of 
any kind is illegal.  I recall that vote-swapping sites were shut down 
after they popped up in the Gore-Nader-Bush election.  (I don't remember 
if it was the Supreme Court who made that decision.)  I think that if 
your site got to be too popular, it would be shut down as illegal.

Yes, continue to pioneer, and push against unfairness.  But be willing 
to change course as needed.

Richard Fobes

> The exception would be if enough people used the Vote Pact idea that
> Stein or Johnson won. But that would be a good outcome from your point
> of view, right? Otherwise, why did you enter into the vote pact?
>     Participating in your VotePact approach requires finding someone to
>     trust.  And the trusting not only applies to trusting who the person
>     will actually vote for, but trusting that the person is not also
>     making a similar arrangement with yet another voter.
> This is addressed at http://www.votepact.org/about/ under "The Issue of
> Trust." You can get absentee ballots, fill them out in each other's
> presence and mail them together. Or you can go to the polls together and
> check each other's ballots before turning them in.
>     In other words, it's really, really hard to find someone you trust
>     who also has the opposite political preference.
> In a swing state, it shouldn't be that hard to find your opposite. As
> for trust, see above.
>     Expressed as a Venn diagram, the overlap between someone I trust and
>     someone who has the opposite political view is empty.
>     Here's part of what I hope to convey in the article:
>     A single-mark ballot is not asking for the voter's first choice.  If
>     it was, it would also ask for a second choice.
>     Instead a single-mark ballot is equivalent to being given a marble
>     and being asked to put it into the bucket with their "preferred"
>     candidate's name on the bucket.  And only the two heaviest buckets
>     will have their marbles counted.  The other buckets might as well be
>     bottomless.
>     Richard Fobes
>     On 9/19/2016 12:00 AM, Jan Kok wrote:
>         On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 10:42 PM, VoteFair
>         <ElectionMethods at votefair.org <mailto:ElectionMethods at votefair.org>
>         <mailto:ElectionMethods at votefair.org
>         <mailto:ElectionMethods at votefair.org>>> wrote:
>              ...
>              I will use the image as part of an article I'm writing that
>         explains
>              why voters in swing states should not vote for a
>         third-party candidate.
>         Before you publish that article, please check out VotePact.org
>     ----
>     Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for
>     list info

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list