• 0 Posts
  • 127 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle


  • I’m asking for the individual candidates to lay out their specific political goals. The party can continue to publish its platform and planks.

    Then people vote based on whether they want to see those goals met. When those politicians are up for re-election, it’s fairly easy for someone to tabulate whether or not those goals were met. If there are extenuating circumstances (overwhelming opposition, for example), then they can use that to defend themselves. This would help hold their feet to the fire.

    As for voting ideologically, I attribute that mostly to FPTP - people feel as though they cannot do anything but vote ideologically because there are no real alternatives. That’s why RCV is extremely important.






  • I assume it’s the same in most areas - humans are really susceptible to sampling bias and if you live in an urban area, you’re going to see a higher number of immigrants or foreigners. Plus, in Japan specifically, there’s currently a big backlash against tourists fucking with people’s daily routines, so I’m sure people mentally think there must be hordes of foreigners constantly invading the country.

    Interesting that Argentina has the largest disparity here, actually. I would have expected it to be the US, given the rhetoric.



  • Hard disagree. It’s really easy for candidates to talk the talk on the campaign trail, and then do a 180 once they’re in office.

    That being said, this doesn’t work if you let them use flowery speech and vague promises. If you had parties submit a platform of actually actionable decisions they would make (e.g. “decrease the federal minimum wage”), you’d be able to suss out what they actually want to do. It would also provide a rubric for re-election - how many of the things you wanted to do did you accomplish? Are there good reasons why you weren’t able to?