Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 01, 2014, 09:29:16 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 855
1  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update XVI: Sidejackin' it in the Train Room. on: Today at 04:02:16 pm
If it's really what you expect it to be, then congratulations.
2  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Telephone polls are useful after all ... on: Today at 10:42:14 am
Are you paid to do advertizing for Fischer? One could come to that conclusion Wink
3  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Small Business on: Today at 06:08:05 am
You'd think half the people in the country were small business owners going by GOP rhetoric/propaganda.
4  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of John Boehner on: Today at 06:05:42 am
Hard to take him seriously
5  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: July 2014 Federal Special Election - At-Large Senate on: Today at 04:34:54 am
1. Matt from VT
2. Dr. Cynic
3. Mechaman
4. Poirot
5. Spiral
6. write-in: Donald Duck
7. write-in: Al
8. write-in: Franzl
9. write-in: Vladimir Putin
10. JCL
6  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Regional Governments / Re: Inks.LWC v. Mideast Region (Superior Court) on: July 31, 2014, 01:49:07 pm
I'm assuming from the lack of response to the Court's query that the Defense doesn't wish to call witnesses either, and further rests its case.

The Court will deliberate and seek to post a ruling no later than tomorrow evening.

Yes, Your Honor, the defense rests its case.
7  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Regional Governments / Re: Inks.LWC v. Mideast Region (Superior Court) on: July 31, 2014, 11:16:00 am
Quote from: Badger link=topic=196189.msg4248821#msg4248821

Second, a question for the Plaintiff (which I'll allow the Defense to subsequently respond to if it wishes, as I will for later questions to the Defense): To what degree did the issue of voter intent (or lack thereof) apply in the Badger holding?


I believe that Badger stands for the principle that voter intent can only be followed if doing so is legally permissible. Voter intent here would be to give first preference to Al. That is not legally permissible because Al did not accept write-ins. Thus, as a corollary, it is legally impermissible for voter intent to trump the state and redistribute those votes to Franzl.
If I may present a short rebuttal to this:

Speaking of voters' intent to give a "first preference" is illogical, as the numerical preferences are irrelevant in STV. A vote is understood to go to the highest available candidate in any particular count. Whether that's a 1st, 2nd or 17th preference is inconsequential.

As previously demonstrated, it's perfectly legal (and necessary!) to count the highest preferences for the highest valid candidate, and only this is also in accordance with voter intent.
8  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Regional Governments / Re: Inks.LWC v. Mideast Region (Superior Court) on: July 31, 2014, 10:59:04 am
Thank you LG TJ. The Court is satisfied with (and appriciative of) this tally.

I would ask the Plaintiff again to address tthe Court's question about Badger creating a precedence of general deference to the election administrator's decision.

I would ask the Defendant to elaborate on/spell out the application of the portion of Badger he quotes ("That George Orwell can't accept votes..." etc.) To the case at hand.

Finally, I would ask each party to advise whether any witnesses will be called. IF the answer from both parties is no, I'd ask them each to present any concluding arguments they feel are necessary (if any) or otherwsie declare they are resting their case.

The passage I quoted from Badger served no other purpose but to demonstrate that Al, as a non-candidate and unable to win a seat, did not actually receive votes and would be unable to do so. Therefore, for the reasons I mentioned in my previous post, the highest preference for a valid candidate is to be included in the first count.
9  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls / Re: IL-Reboot Illinois/WeAskAmerica: Gov. Quinn (D) down 14 on: July 30, 2014, 02:43:54 pm
Again, the Cook Cnty area will come in heavily for Quinn at last moment.
I agree with you 100%. Pat Quinn is pretty safe considering Cook County.

Ab incumbent down 14 is not safe.
10  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Regional Governments / Re: Inks.LWC v. Mideast Region (Superior Court) on: July 30, 2014, 12:23:23 am
A question for both parties:

First, is there any way in your analysis that Badger and Transition... (hereafter AR 6) can be reconciled to nullify only the first preference votes for Al of the 3 contested votes, but somehow still permit application of the 2nd and subsequent preferences listed? I'm having trouble seeing at what point in the counting the votes would be applied to second preferences under the PR-STV statute, but the Court would like your (plural) assessment here.

Second, a question for the Plaintiff (which I'll allow the Defense to subsequently respond to if it wishes, as I will for later questions to the Defense): To what degree did the issue of voter intent (or lack thereof) apply in the Badger holding?

For the Defense (with Plaintiff right of rebuttal): Are you conceding that the specific holding on ballot interpretation in Badger cannot be reconciled with the election results you ask this Court to uphold?

To your first question directed to both of us, the defense would argue that invalidating the voters' first preferences would have no effect but to deny the non-candidate the votes. The votes in question would automatically be included for Franzl in the first count.

To the second question, the one posed directly to me, I would say that the reasoning in Badger can be applied, just not to reach the conclusion suggested by the plaintiff that the entire ballots are to be invalidated.

It is important to note that preferences had a different meaning in the previous electoral system than under PR-STV. In reality, one was casting 3 (or 5) votes of differing value. Votes did not transfer and there was an important distinction between a first and a second preference. Invalidating the first preference for a non-candidate made sense, as invalidation would not effect any of the other votes cast.

Indeed, Badger states: "That George Orwell cannot accept votes means that he cannot win, not that the vote is invisible on the ballot paper or in counting terms."

Ignoring Al in the count should have no other effect than to deny him the votes as a non-candidate. This interpretation fits the spirit of the cited case more accurately than the plaintiff's interpretation.

Badger goes on to state that "highest preference" can be regarded as functionally equivalent to "first preference". If this is the case, then one can only conclude that, logically, this goes both ways. If a first preference is highest, then vice versa, the highest preference must be seen as equivalent to a first preference.

A.R. 5 states: "3. A first count shall then be made quantifying the total number of first preferences each valid candidate did receive."

Surely this means that the most highly preferenced VALID candidate is to be included in the first count. In other words, as previously argued, this is not a vote transfer as the plaintiff suggests, but rather a necessary part of the first count. It is the only logical application in PR-STV, where only the order of preferencing is relevant, not the numerical preferences themselves, as under the previous electoral system.

Should the Court, however, rule differently and feel that the defense has not made a convincing case, the defense would lastly like to draw attention to the fact that Badger specifically affirms that the election administrator is within his rights to go against precedent if he feels that doing so is more in line with the law. If nothing else, his certification, as it stands, is a reasonable application of this electoral system in a way that is most in mine with voter intent.
11  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Regional Governments / Re: Inks.LWC v. Mideast Region (Superior Court) on: July 29, 2014, 11:28:00 pm
Here's a preliminary question for the parties: HYPOTHETICALLY, if Plaintiff's position is correct that the entire ballots cast by Earl, Ben & Malsipines are fully legal nullities, how would the election have changed? Preliminarily, it seems that the Total Valid Poll would thereby be reduced to only 18, and the quota to just 5. It appears Spiral and Cassius both would've been elected on the first round, and that's as far into the calculation I'm willing to do myself. Please advise. Acting Gov. TJ is welcome to offer his calculations.

The Court will note for the record that it isn't interested in making it's decision fit a particular outcome. Whatever the Court determines is the legally necessary ruling will stand. The Court is primarily interested in ensuring that the Plaintiff's unrebutted assertion Franzl would've been excluded should've the 3 votes mentioned above been voided, and thus avoid any potential issue of mootness. As a secondary matter the Court is somewhat interested in the impact such ruling would have, as it is germane to Defendant's argument, though not necessarily dispositive to a Court's ultimate ruling here.

Get calculating.

If the ballots in question were fully legal nullities, Spiral, Cassius and Inks would have been elected. The defense does not dispute this.
12  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls / Re: IL-Reboot Illinois/WeAskAmerica: Gov. Quinn (D) down 14 on: July 29, 2014, 11:12:12 am
I'm afraid the good guys really will lose this time.

Oh well, not like Rauner will be able to do anything with Madigan around.
13  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Regional Governments / Re: Inks.LWC v. Mideast Region (Superior Court) on: July 29, 2014, 10:32:06 am
Defense:

The ruling cited by the plaintiff in Badger et al v. Inks.LWC finds agreement with the defense, insofar as that there is no dispute that a first preference cast for someone who is not a candidate should be considered a "legal nullity", but this can and should only be interpreted to mean that the non-candidate in question cannot be regarded to have received this first preference, rather than to invalidate the entire ballot.

Plaintiff cites the Transition to PR-STV Act, arguing that the precise wording forbids transfering the uncounted first preference because they come not from an eliminated candidate or one that has been elected with a surplus.

The defense argues, however, that no transfer is necessary as the vote is to be counted as a highest preference vote for the most highly preferenced valid candidate. Plaintiff correctly predicted that the defense will stress that the Badger ruling cannot be applied due to the different electoral system under which elections to the Mideast Assembly now operate. This is correct, because the defense believes this makes a difference of great magnitude, one that cannot be ignored.

Unlike the previous system used by the Mideast, that in which the highly unusual counting specifically tallied "first, second, etc." preferences and assigned them varying values (e.g. the highest number of 1st AND 2nd preferences being necessary to be elected to the second Assembly seat), PR-STV makes no such distinction. Under the present system, it is understood that a vote is not exhausted until no valid candidate remains that can receive the vote or a fraction thereof.

Invalidating the entire ballots of those who gave their first preference this election to a non-candidate, Al, would have an dramatically different effect than in the case cited. Whereas under the previous system, ignoring the first preference did not affect any other preferences awarded, doing as plaintiff suggests in this case would disenfranchise several voters entirely. It is implicity understood in PR-STV that a vote will maintain its validity in some form until no valid candidates remain to whom preferences can be awarded.

Voter intent would indeed be totally ignored by declaring the ballots in question invalid and thereby denying the defendent his rightful seat in the Assembly. The claim made by the plaintiff that this is not the case because plaintiff was awarded 3 first preferences as opposed to 1 for the defendent, is not a sensible way of reviewing voter intent. Using an election system where the numerical preference awarded is irrelevant, one cannot conclude that Inks was the voters' prefered candidate on the basis of the first preferences awarded. The very nature of preferential voting means that one isn't forced to vote strategically to ensure that the candidate one considers the "lesser evil" is elected to office. Indeed, these voters preferenced Franzl more highly than Inks. If one's goal is to provide representation in a way that is most in accordance with the will of the people of this region, one can only conclude that the election administration has done so properly and totally in the spirit of the election system that is used in our region.

The defense therefore concludes that the plaintiff is mistaken and kindly requests that justice be served by allowing me to take the seat to which I was rightly elected.

Should they be necessary, the defense welcomes further questions by Your Honor.
14  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update XVI: Sidejackin' it in the Train Room. on: July 29, 2014, 08:08:24 am
At least he should have time to contact them about the certificate now.

I plan to contact them today.

Certainly a good idea. I'm sure you'll find more employers in that field willing to consider you once you can actually prove your competence in CADD.
15  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update XVI: Sidejackin' it in the Train Room. on: July 29, 2014, 08:05:36 am
At least he should have time to contact them about the certificate now.
16  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Poll: Capitalism dying? on: July 29, 2014, 01:35:40 am
If capitalism dies, mankind's ability to progress will die.

Not certainly, but capitalism has lead to a lot of competition in order to get a better, cheaper product and that's where the driving force for a lot of innovation in technology comes from. In this system, which there are a lot of flaws, it has worked better than our friends in the USSR and Cuba.

I think it would be best to continue to have a mixed market system, where some things are controlled by the government (schools, police), and others not controlled by the government (businesses) but needs to pay their fair share so everybody can prosper. Almost the current system we have now.
Capitalism is much more efficient than a mixed market system. The only reason we can have a mixed market system is because pure capitalism created enough wealth for all of these safety nets. Capitalism literally has no flaws.

I can see the argument that it's the best system we've come up with...but no flaws? LOL
17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Arizona execution lasts almost 2 hours on: July 29, 2014, 01:31:11 am
Why should the legal definition of malice be relevant in whether I consider executions to be murder? I'm not a lawyer and have no interest in being one.

The yogi berra I haven't been following the thread answer: Arguably the term "murder" is a term of art, and one of its elements is malice (or malice a forethought, badger, correct me). So when the term murder is used, it's not unreasonable, and actually highly predictable to expect a discussion on malice.



Sure, but I think we've demonstrated that we feel malice is certainly involved, fulfilling the definition of murder. It's obviously not a legal argument, as we otherwise wouldn't be having this debate about executions in 2014 if there were a legal case to be made.
18  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Arizona execution lasts almost 2 hours on: July 29, 2014, 01:24:42 am
Why should the legal definition of malice be relevant in whether I consider executions to be murder? I'm not a lawyer and have no interest in being one.
19  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Judge strikes down DC's ban on handguns outside home on: July 28, 2014, 11:22:39 pm
The Second Amendment may be the dumbest statute still standing in the modern era.

Hey, I've found a statement of yours with which I couldn't agree more strongly...
Yeah, the fact that a guy who is probably a Nazi sympathizer is proclaiming the need for guns to be taken away from civilians doesn't really help your argument.

Thinking the 2nd amendment is crazy doesn't equate wanting to take all guns away. Although even the wording "take guns away" is an oddly American sentiment.

So you're one of those "the Nazis took guns away!!" people?
20  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Judge strikes down DC's ban on handguns outside home on: July 28, 2014, 02:58:22 pm
The Second Amendment may be the dumbest statute still standing in the modern era.

Hey, I've found a statement of yours with which I couldn't agree more strongly...
21  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Judge strikes down DC's ban on handguns outside home on: July 28, 2014, 01:35:33 pm
You'd think Christmas came early judging some of the reactions here.
22  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: I'm Baaack!...Sort Of on: July 28, 2014, 11:37:10 am
Oh what a joy...
23  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What percentage of your posts are topics started? on: July 28, 2014, 10:02:11 am
1.3%
24  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: America Is In Danger on: July 28, 2014, 07:16:43 am
Then I suppose Europe should also be worried that Americans can travel to Europe without a visa?
25  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update XVI: Sidejackin' it in the Train Room. on: July 28, 2014, 07:09:20 am
I have made my decision after sleeping on it and I'm going to make the unpopular decision of pulling the plug and then get started on the job search as soon as I get back home.

As long as you can squeeze in an application or two between baseball games, I'm sure it'll be alright.

How about I look for jobs during baseball games?  I can do that, too.

I'm impressed.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 855


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines