Would your vote go to Nader if you lived in an "uncalled" state? What would you like to see of electoral reform?
IRV and Condorse voting seem cool, but neither are a slam dunk due to May's theorem (if I'm getting my math right; ie. there are situations where clearly the voters demanded one candidate, but the system gives the winner to someone else). Proportional representation seems cool, but that would require a massive change to our government, and it has its own problems with fringe groups controlling the more moderate parties.
I guess for myself one of the biggest issues I care about [that can practically be done (I think the vegetarian cause is important, but in no way can there be major politcal work done on that; so what I mean by "big" here is through the prism of realism)] is energy. Bush has a crappy energy policy, and Kerry has a damn good one. He uses rhetoric about being energy independent so as to loosen our middle-eastern ties: but that's just rhetoric. The reality is that there will be an energy recession that will become and energy depression without: (1) politicians working with the industry and creating the right incentives while energy is cheap enough to execute them; or (2) an energy miracle, like controlled fusion (eight limbed man/machines not withstanding).
Also important to me is health care. If you've been following my blog, you've probably read the Krugman article that has sound ideas for lowering premiums, all part of Kerry's plans.
I agree with you that these haven't been very well communicated. Hopefully these great ideas can be put out appropriately, as like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. That ought to boost the polls even higher.
Anyway, I think Dean is right in that Bush is particularly a terrible president and I think most everyone sees that: the democratic party has never before been so united. Even Nader chooses to attack Dean instead of his friend Kerry.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-17 06:40 am (UTC)IRV and Condorse voting seem cool, but neither are a slam dunk due to May's theorem (if I'm getting my math right; ie. there are situations where clearly the voters demanded one candidate, but the system gives the winner to someone else). Proportional representation seems cool, but that would require a massive change to our government, and it has its own problems with fringe groups controlling the more moderate parties.
I guess for myself one of the biggest issues I care about [that can practically be done (I think the vegetarian cause is important, but in no way can there be major politcal work done on that; so what I mean by "big" here is through the prism of realism)] is energy. Bush has a crappy energy policy, and Kerry has a damn good one. He uses rhetoric about being energy independent so as to loosen our middle-eastern ties: but that's just rhetoric. The reality is that there will be an energy recession that will become and energy depression without: (1) politicians working with the industry and creating the right incentives while energy is cheap enough to execute them; or (2) an energy miracle, like controlled fusion (eight limbed man/machines not withstanding).
Also important to me is health care. If you've been following my blog, you've probably read the Krugman article that has sound ideas for lowering premiums, all part of Kerry's plans.
I agree with you that these haven't been very well communicated. Hopefully these great ideas can be put out appropriately, as like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. That ought to boost the polls even higher.
Anyway, I think Dean is right in that Bush is particularly a terrible president and I think most everyone sees that: the democratic party has never before been so united. Even Nader chooses to attack Dean instead of his friend Kerry.