Comments on: Wolves on Tour

By: jph wacheski

jph wacheski — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:58:45 +0000

reading the excerps is much more illuminating than the short video,. I recomend doing so! very interesting,. .

By: jph wacheski

jph wacheski — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:53:59 +0000

I agree it is a week clip more info about the book would be helpful,. .
Gore Vidal is correct, both parties are private ownership / corporate rule parties,.
Ranged Voting sounds interesting, . however it doesn’t change the ’system’ it is still a popularity contest,. giveing some individual power for a four year run and no accountability for broken promices and misdeeds,. i.e. corporate sellouts,. real democracy has to come from the people,. too bad people have been stupified by the pirate bankers into non-participation.

By: Livingearth

Livingearth — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:02:59 +0000

That video clip is weak sauce. No info to get me to read a book that helps the right at a time where the democratic leadership need coalition and guidance not naderizm and egotism.

By: Clay Shentrup

Clay Shentrup — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:19:56 +0000

s/importance/important

And hey! I correctly guessed Gore Vidal.

Anyone who’s seen Gattaca knows he’s a wise man.

By: Clay Shentrup

Clay Shentrup — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:17:44 +0000

Stephen,

I saw you on Molotov (an Internet television show).

Two-party duopoly is caused by our horrendous plurality (vote for one) voting method. A far better solution that eliminates this problem is called Range Voting - meaning “score all the candidates, and the best average wins”. Here’s an example of a Range Voting election:
http://zohopolls.com/us/pres

Social utility efficiency calculations by Princeton math Ph.D. Warren D. Smith show that Range Voting would hugely increase average voter satisfaction, effectively DOUBLING the effect of democracy (and arguably going even beyond that). This effect is especially pronounced when many voters are strategic instead of honest (i.e. they “game the system”).
http://rangevoting.org/vsi.html

Range Voting helps decrease the importance of CASH in elections, which is an incredibly valuable property (oh, what a pun).
http://rangevoting.org/RL2parties.html#cash

We believe Range Voting is by far the most importance single issue in the world, dwarfing things like global warming or election fraud.
http://rangevoting.org/LivesSaved.html

Best of all, the simplest form of Range Voting (called Approval Voting) can be implemented by changing just one rule with our current system. Change “vote for one” to “vote for one or more”, and just count all the votes. It’s okay to vote for more than one candidate. A non-vote for a candidate is effectively a vote “against” him, so all ballots are in essence equally powerful (i.e. it is fair).

We have to have a voting method where voters needn’t fear supporting their sincere favorite. Unfortunately a huge number of reformers have been misled into thinking that the solution is Instant Runoff Voting. This is simply false. See our letter regarding this issue, to the IRV community (and Californians for Electoral Reform specifically).
http://rangevoting.org/CFERlet.html

Please help spread the word about Range Voting.

Regards,
Clay Shentrup
San Francisco, CA
clay@electopia.org
415.240.1973

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:46:43 +0000

Zach… the right answer is Gore Vidal, which is the one bolded…

By: Hassan

Hassan — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:31:12 +0000

Stephen,

I work at a college radio station and do a International News and Politics show, could you please give a phone interview, I cant find an email anywhere!

By: Zach

Zach — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 05:50:23 +0000

The readers poll, “We only have one political party in the U.S., and that is the Property Party, which has two right wings.” - Who said it?” deserves comment: The majority of your readers got it wrong. What good is the poll if it spreads incorrect knowledge?

Here: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040913/vidal