3 ms·

Getting an accurate count is not the issue; that's part of the show. The issue is that you only have one single vote out of hundreds of millions and the pool of

Getting an accurate count is not the issue; that's part of the show. The issue is that you only have one single vote out of hundreds of millions and the pool of candidates is ridiculously, ridiculously limited. In a fair system with over 300 million potential candidates, how likely would it be that a father and his son would both be elected as president (as was the case for George Bush junior/senior)? What about the Clintons? When we factor in the empirical evidence, how can we still think that one vote out of hundreds of millions make any difference at all?

reaperducer 8y ago
how likely would it be that a father and his son would both be elected as president If all 300 million people lived identical lives and had identical histories, then the chances are about one in 300 million. In the real world, people who take specific life paths, get specific degrees, and acquire specific skills are more likely than others to end up in a particular place. Especially when the other 299,999,999 people get to weigh in on the decision. Just as not every one of those 300 million people has an equal chance of becoming a database administrator at Google, and not every one of those 300 million people has an equal chance of becoming a barista.
snowwrestler 8y ago
Are you familiar with the personal history of Bill Clinton? Needless to say, his dad was not president. I once looked up the personal histories of U.S. presidents. It was about 50% candidates who came from well-connected families (like both Bushes or FDR), and about 50% candidates who rose from seemingly humble beginnings (like Clinton, Truman, Eisenhower). It crosses party lines; both Carter and Reagan had humble beginnings. Have you run for office yourself? You might feel differently about votes if you did. The field of candidates is only limited at the end. At the beginning, as you point out, it could be anyone. And logically, a high volume of votes can't disprove the value of a single vote. If a single vote did not have any value, neither would a high volume of such votes! But if a million votes are worth something, then each vote must be worth something too.

reaperducer 8y ago

how likely would it be that a father and his son would both be elected as president If all 300 million people lived identical lives and had identical histories, then the chances are about one in 300 million. In the real world, people who take specific life paths, get specific degrees, and acquire specific skills are more likely than others to end up in a particular place. Especially when the other 299,999,999 people get to weigh in on the decision. Just as not every one of those 300 million people has an equal chance of becoming a database administrator at Google, and not every one of those 300 million people has an equal chance of becoming a barista.

snowwrestler 8y ago

Are you familiar with the personal history of Bill Clinton? Needless to say, his dad was not president. I once looked up the personal histories of U.S. presidents. It was about 50% candidates who came from well-connected families (like both Bushes or FDR), and about 50% candidates who rose from seemingly humble beginnings (like Clinton, Truman, Eisenhower). It crosses party lines; both Carter and Reagan had humble beginnings. Have you run for office yourself? You might feel differently about votes if you did. The field of candidates is only limited at the end. At the beginning, as you point out, it could be anyone. And logically, a high volume of votes can't disprove the value of a single vote. If a single vote did not have any value, neither would a high volume of such votes! But if a million votes are worth something, then each vote must be worth something too.