Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
[Wisconsin] no longer ascribes to representational democracy
Posts
I wonder if entering opposing parties' primaries in an attempt to knock off incumbants twice is ever going to become a thing.
From page 13...
The primary is 'open' but it is still a partisan (i.e: Democratic Party) primary. Calling it a Democratic primary is not a rhetorical misdirection.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/19827327#Comment_19827327
Scott Ashjian's fake Tea Party candidacy in Nevada is a good example of the sort of thing that went on in 2010.
Having the closest polling station 5 hours away would be impossible. There are polling stations everywhere, and depending on redistricting there are plenty of new places to put them (until my old town got a city hall they just used the school, for example). But you'd still likely end up with situations like the reservations, where there are like 5 polling stations for an area one-third the size of Rhode Island.
It would also help prevent Gerrymandering, because Gerrymandering is a very specific type of redistricting where one party attempts to redistrict to its own advtantage - to marginalize its competition. This is why we often end up with ridiculous districts that snake around each other and form completely illogical shapes.
It is illegal, but who in wisconsin would enforce it?
Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
Prosser.
Feel free to add me on whatever network, it's always more fun to play with people than alone
My guess is that they want to catch travellers, or just want the Republicans to know what's coming for them.
That trick has been making the rounds all over the country for a few years now. The thing is, by the time any complaint gets made and it rolls through the largely toothless FEC, the damage has been done, and the people who did it get a slap on the wrist fine, or at worst have to dissolve their group and start a new one with a different name.
I'm of the opinion that anyone who interferes with the voting process in such an egregious way should lose their own right to vote. Of course, actually implementing that without any sort of slippery slope (where do you draw the line?) would be tricky.
It's almost as if the same people constantly extolling the wisdom and self-determination of the average person treat them as defenseless snowflakes in certain contexts.
Just make it a felony with jail time, and raise the barrier of entry to that form of fraud from "you might need your backers to pay a few hundred thousand in fines" to "anyone found to be involved will be in jail for the next 10 years"
The only issue is when you're doing it for an office with pardon powers, but one would hope an elected official would be up on impeachment charges in seconds if it was found that they ordered people to commit a felony with the promise of a pardon in order to get elected.
Considering how much more on average a unionized worker makes I'm not sure they have a lot of room to complain about dues either.
Yeah, it was a classic half a baby decision.
High road for once hasn't fucked us!
Nod. Get treat. PSN: QuipFilter
Thought this was suggested and then shot down pretty quickly afterwards?
It also served no purpose. The entire point of running the spoilers wasn't to knock anyone out of the running (they weren't going to win), it was just to delay the elections by a month or two in order to give the incumbents more time in office and possibly burn out steam on the recall engine by trying to stagger the actual recall elections (iirc, the dems proposed to run their own spoilers in their own primary to force all the recalls to happen at the same time still)
Honestly, this is par for the course with most things in society. Punishment-After-The-Fact is fundamentally and horribly flawed, even though we love to use it. Shit, it's one of the reasons the entire Tort system sucks.
It's especially bad with elections and other time-constrained stuff because there's no way to fix the problem in time.
With Wisconsin's open primaries the Republicans were taking the long shot chance that one of their spoilers would win. It wasn't an incredible long shot with it being a short window, no incumbents and everybody, R and D and I, able to vote in the primary. If I recall correctly they also wanted to get the elections staggered to prevent a wave of momentum from being built and string out the D's money supply by making them spend on two elections instead of one.
The Democrats were really only trying to prevent R challenges so the primary would be a walk requiring little resources and to control the election dates, getting as many as possible to fall on the same day so make a giant push easier.
This is another of those things that make more sense if you understand that R's want less people who might vote to vote and D's want everybody possible to vote.
Nod. Get treat. PSN: QuipFilter
But what it really is all about is having another month to push through Walker's odious agenda.
But will he drive him before him and hear the lamentations of his women?
We can only hope
Yeah. This guy is the vanderleast of Hansen's worries.
One election down, eight to go.
Congratulations! You managed to find a single example of something you claimed had "dozens of other examples". I would like to see, I don't know, 7 more examples or so before I believe your claim as to the frequency of the occurrence.
Also, how often are you going to keep moving the goalposts? You've done it about three times already.
Edit: Which obviously doesn't count since you were talking about spoiler candidates in primaries, not trying to leach votes from a candidate in the general. D'oh.
You'll have to point out this alleged goalpost movement, as your snarky attitude marks you uninterested in a conversation (as opposed to point scoring) and thus renders all your accusations suspect. In fact, I only count "about" five posts in the whole thread that set out any sort of goal or threshold for someone to get beyond at all, so it'd be impressive for that collection to have three "moving goalposts" fallacies; they aren't even on the same specific topic.
Do you really want me to find seven examples of spoiler candidates over 200 years of US electoral history?
No. Believe it or don't, it was conjecture on my part... as I made abundantly clear in yet another post you didn't quote. Carrot disagrees, and while he's basically appealing to his own authority I'm not going to ask him to prove a negative. I gave one good example of a spoiler in the 2010 races as a partial refutation, and the article (which I'm guessing you didn't read) lists a few others, but I'm willing to bow to Carrot's supposed encyclopedic knowledge of 2 centuries of Congressional primary elections. If the dude says he knows that much about US Electoral politics, it doesn't bother me much to accept that.
For the time being at least.