5 ms·

Vote manipulation? Yes. Just what we need? Definitely. I cannot think of a scenario where having more people in a representative sample would be worse than

by Qworg 14y ago

Vote manipulation? Yes. Just what we need? Definitely. I cannot think of a scenario where having more people in a representative sample would be worse than having less.

btilly 14y ago
What is this "representative sample" that you're talking about? It is well-known that the subset of the population that goes to the polls is NOT representative of the country as a whole. That is why pollsters are so careful to get polls of "likely voters". Because Republicans tend to be more motivated to vote than Democrats, so if they just took a poll of everyone they called, the results would always be strongly skewed Democrat. (Getting this right is very tricky, and different methodologies around it is one reason that different pollsters often have a consistent difference in the polls that they produce.)
- prakashk 14y ago
  Whether the voting public is a "representative sample" or not, it does not change the main point of the GP.
tjoff 14y ago
I can. If you can't be bothered to vote your vote isn't needed. You have no clue what you are voting for and you can not, in any conceivable way, make a reasonable judgment of who to vote. I cannot think of a scenario where having more people, who have no clue about why or who they are voting on (and this is sadly the vast majority of people), will be better than having less. It looks good if have there are a lot of people participating but you have not gained anything if those that voted did not have the slightest of interest in it.
- bhassel 14y ago
  I agree that people without a clue have no business voting. But be careful making the assumption that someone who "can't be bothered to vote" is less informed. Even the well-informed can end up thinking "my vote doesn't matter anyway, so why bother." And rationally, they are not exactly wrong. Yet, the system would break down if everyone took that view. People need to be encouraged to vote, even though they may see it as a waste of time, because in aggregate their votes are important.

by Qworg 14y ago

Vote manipulation? Yes. Just what we need? Definitely. I cannot think of a scenario where having more people in a representative sample would be worse than having less.

btilly 14y ago

What is this "representative sample" that you're talking about? It is well-known that the subset of the population that goes to the polls is NOT representative of the country as a whole. That is why pollsters are so careful to get polls of "likely voters". Because Republicans tend to be more motivated to vote than Democrats, so if they just took a poll of everyone they called, the results would always be strongly skewed Democrat. (Getting this right is very tricky, and different methodologies around it is one reason that different pollsters often have a consistent difference in the polls that they produce.)

prakashk 14y ago
Whether the voting public is a "representative sample" or not, it does not change the main point of the GP.

tjoff 14y ago

I can. If you can't be bothered to vote your vote isn't needed. You have no clue what you are voting for and you can not, in any conceivable way, make a reasonable judgment of who to vote. I cannot think of a scenario where having more people, who have no clue about why or who they are voting on (and this is sadly the vast majority of people), will be better than having less. It looks good if have there are a lot of people participating but you have not gained anything if those that voted did not have the slightest of interest in it.

bhassel 14y ago
I agree that people without a clue have no business voting. But be careful making the assumption that someone who "can't be bothered to vote" is less informed. Even the well-informed can end up thinking "my vote doesn't matter anyway, so why bother." And rationally, they are not exactly wrong. Yet, the system would break down if everyone took that view. People need to be encouraged to vote, even though they may see it as a waste of time, because in aggregate their votes are important.