You mean the "what's the probability that your vote is the deciding one?" That was interesting, but it seemed like a theoretical problem to me.
I would characterize what I'm doing here as a fairly standard calculation of the partial derivative dP/dV_i, where P is probability of a political outcome, and V_i is number of votes cast for a candidate in state i.
In this notation, they calculated some function of P'(0.5), where P' indicates the inverse of P(V_i).
So, I have a (vague) question about the philosophy of this site.
In, say, senate elections we are only allowed to vote in one state, the state of our residence.
But we can contribute money to any state - which seems a strange thing but, hey, freedom of speech I guess?
Of course, it also seems strange to me that money seems to matter so much because, after all, can't the voters make up their minds for themselves from unbiased sources?
Like, maybe I get it that in pre-internet days it took money to spread the word but nowadays plenty of websites present rather objective views for free.
So, where do you stand on money in politics? Is it closer to "a good thing" or to a "well, them's the rules so we must play that way"? And what is your view on why it matters so much? It seems to put the question to democracy that I can just blast people with biased ads and affect their votes ...
I ask these things because it seems one needs a foundation for "what is good" in order to discriminate between "bugs" and "features" of anything going on in our democracy.
7 months and 7 weeks seem straightforward enough, though the "improved" in "improved voting rules" seems unclear.
Electoral College reform: by this do you mean that what you really want is to eliminate equal representation of the states in the senate? Or just a nationwide popular vote for the presidency?
Ideally I am thinking of a "manifesto" that outlines what democratic ideals should be, in a practical world.
The curated WinRed links give an empty result. That's not a technical problem, right?
Bob, thank you for catching that link error. Fixed now!
Sam, this is interesting. Reminds me of the 2010 Gelman/Silver/Edlin paper for the Electoral College.
You mean the "what's the probability that your vote is the deciding one?" That was interesting, but it seemed like a theoretical problem to me.
I would characterize what I'm doing here as a fairly standard calculation of the partial derivative dP/dV_i, where P is probability of a political outcome, and V_i is number of votes cast for a candidate in state i.
In this notation, they calculated some function of P'(0.5), where P' indicates the inverse of P(V_i).
So, I have a (vague) question about the philosophy of this site.
In, say, senate elections we are only allowed to vote in one state, the state of our residence.
But we can contribute money to any state - which seems a strange thing but, hey, freedom of speech I guess?
Of course, it also seems strange to me that money seems to matter so much because, after all, can't the voters make up their minds for themselves from unbiased sources?
Like, maybe I get it that in pre-internet days it took money to spread the word but nowadays plenty of websites present rather objective views for free.
So, where do you stand on money in politics? Is it closer to "a good thing" or to a "well, them's the rules so we must play that way"? And what is your view on why it matters so much? It seems to put the question to democracy that I can just blast people with biased ads and affect their votes ...
I ask these things because it seems one needs a foundation for "what is good" in order to discriminate between "bugs" and "features" of anything going on in our democracy.
7 years: idealistic reforms, work towards the best outcomes. Example: Electoral College reform.
7 months: practical reforms, take what can be done. Example: improved voting rules.
7 weeks: rules are in place, can't change them. Operate within the realm of what is possible.
7 months and 7 weeks seem straightforward enough, though the "improved" in "improved voting rules" seems unclear.
Electoral College reform: by this do you mean that what you really want is to eliminate equal representation of the states in the senate? Or just a nationwide popular vote for the presidency?
Ideally I am thinking of a "manifesto" that outlines what democratic ideals should be, in a practical world.
When making a donation on the ActBlue site, the return e-mail says it's for the 2020 election. May want to update that so you don't freak people out.