Comments on: Incentivizing Better Voting http://www.infiniteinjury.org/blog/2007/09/30/incentiving-better-voting/ Good Analysis, Bad Grammar Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:02:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: TruePath http://www.infiniteinjury.org/blog/2007/09/30/incentiving-better-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-3076 TruePath Mon, 02 Mar 2009 06:46:10 +0000 http://www.infiniteinjury.org/blog/2007/09/30/incentiving-better-voting/#comment-3076 <p>Yah, well I don't update regularly enough to keep a large number of repeat visitors and I'm a bit long winded. Besides, people comment when you say something they think is stupid not when you give a complex detailed analysis. But thanks.</p> <p>Anyway as to your comment I don't think education would help. The problem is that certain sorts of beliefs make us feel better (even when we think it's right it hurts to say one person's life is warrants more resources to save than another to give an extreme but sometimes necessary deciscion). Thus it's totally rational to vote in ways that en mass yield bad results when we individually have very little influence over the outcome.</p> <p>The idea with using a random sample of voters is that statistically they will have the same values and concerns as the population at large but since each of them will have significant influence over the ultimate result it becomes worthwhile to endure the pain of facing up to unpleasant truths to get good results.</p> Yah, well I don’t update regularly enough to keep a large number of repeat visitors and I’m a bit long winded. Besides, people comment when you say something they think is stupid not when you give a complex detailed analysis. But thanks.

Anyway as to your comment I don’t think education would help. The problem is that certain sorts of beliefs make us feel better (even when we think it’s right it hurts to say one person’s life is warrants more resources to save than another to give an extreme but sometimes necessary deciscion). Thus it’s totally rational to vote in ways that en mass yield bad results when we individually have very little influence over the outcome.

The idea with using a random sample of voters is that statistically they will have the same values and concerns as the population at large but since each of them will have significant influence over the ultimate result it becomes worthwhile to endure the pain of facing up to unpleasant truths to get good results.

]]> By: Dewitt Durham http://www.infiniteinjury.org/blog/2007/09/30/incentiving-better-voting/comment-page-1/#comment-3059 Dewitt Durham Sun, 01 Mar 2009 05:31:47 +0000 http://www.infiniteinjury.org/blog/2007/09/30/incentiving-better-voting/#comment-3059 <p>I've always thought public education curriculum should include more critical thinking and rationality discussion. Of course these voting biases can't be eliminated entirely, but any reduction would be beneficial. I imagine the percentage of the voting population that is aware of this problem, whether they agree it's a problem or not, is quite small. A little more awareness might go a long way. As this isn't something that could easily be swallowed by the general public with a simple presentation on TV, getting the idea into their heads early and growing some roots could be an effective course of action. Currently, our civics education is essentially working in the opposite direction by instilling an unquestioning faith in democracy [is this a product of the cold war? I'm too young to know]. I wonder how many people even know America is a republic (or why it is).</p> <p>Do you think that in your proposed randomly selected electorate, the politicians making their cases should have an intimate knowledge of the voters and their values, a rough demographic, or be totally in the dark? It seems to me that the increasing influence of polling and surveys during election season has turned politicians towards irrational populism even before the voters do it on election day. Of course this is largely washed out by the fact politicians will usually just say what the polls tell them they should and then revert back towards their original sentiments once in office.</p> <p>Great site by the way, I'm surprised there aren't more comments.</p> I’ve always thought public education curriculum should include more critical thinking and rationality discussion. Of course these voting biases can’t be eliminated entirely, but any reduction would be beneficial. I imagine the percentage of the voting population that is aware of this problem, whether they agree it’s a problem or not, is quite small. A little more awareness might go a long way.
As this isn’t something that could easily be swallowed by the general public with a simple presentation on TV, getting the idea into their heads early and growing some roots could be an effective course of action. Currently, our civics education is essentially working in the opposite direction by instilling an unquestioning faith in democracy [is this a product of the cold war? I'm too young to know]. I wonder how many people even know America is a republic (or why it is).

Do you think that in your proposed randomly selected electorate, the politicians making their cases should have an intimate knowledge of the voters and their values, a rough demographic, or be totally in the dark? It seems to me that the increasing influence of polling and surveys during election season has turned politicians towards irrational populism even before the voters do it on election day. Of course this is largely washed out by the fact politicians will usually just say what the polls tell them they should and then revert back towards their original sentiments once in office.

Great site by the way, I’m surprised there aren’t more comments.

]]>