With our elections’ unverifiable count-results, the elections are illegitimate. If we ever get democracy it will be by demanding verifiable vote-counting in pro-democracy demonstrations.
The most important, interesting and enjoyable part of the 2016 Presidential Poll is looking at the various parties’ platforms. That’s how you find out, from them, what they offer.
Progressives are right about the possibility of a split-vote when they vote for progressive parties if they worry about taking votes from a Democrat. But that doesn’t matter unless you think the Democrat is worth electing or any different from the Republicans.
Voting is only half of democracy. Equally important is open and honest media (something that we currently don’t have any semblance of). In particular, it’s necessary that the public aren’t being fed a lie about what other voters want or which politicians belong to viable political parties.
Vespucci was a genuine navigator. Unlike Columbus, Vespucci knew where he was. In fact, Vespucci was one of the very few people who could find longitude before the introduction of the marine chronometer.
In currently-published atlases and magazines, there are, very nearly, only two world map-projections that are ever encountered nowadays. The purpose of this poll is to find out which map projections people actually like and prefer.
No improvement of any kind is possible until we have verifiable vote-counting. Public Ballot-Imaging is an easy way to make the count verifiable, and therefore legitimate. If machine balloting of any kind is used, then the machine must output a paper ballot
There’s convincing evidence that successful chicken dilemma defection isn’t happening in polls, and that, therefore, polls aren’t having any chicken-dilemma problem. So, evidently, the conditions that obtain in polls are ideal majoritarian conditions.
Voting Conditions: A moral philosopher named Rawls suggested that maximizing the sum of happiness is less important than minimizing the greatest unhappiness. So, one would want to minimize the greatest dis-satisfaction with the outcome.
Responding to question on plausibility of alternating voting methods, Michael Ossipoff said: “Certainly it would be good to try out various methods, and alternating them in successive elections would be one way. “