Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
All posts 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱's posts Post Back to profile
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

My top 3 criteria for picking who I vote for this year will be:

1) Is not Biden
2) Is not Trump
3) Of whoever is left, the most honest, compassionate, and least racist/sexist choice.

#USPol #Biden #Trump #MAGA
27 March at 23:19 | Open on qoto.org
57 comments
iced quinn
Olives

@freemo Are you planning on running for President?

27 March at 23:44 | Open on qoto.org
Louis Ingenthron

@freemo Why even leave the house to vote then?

27 March at 23:52 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@LouisIngenthron

I would say the same about voting for a major party. In not a single election would your vote have changed the outcome, ever. So why do it?

Moreover, if we just look at the significance of your vote, you are a larger percentage of the vote when voting for a third party than when voting for a primary party. Something on the order of 50x **more** impactful when voting for a third party than a primary party in percentage of the vote you account for.

Moreover while not winning or winning for a primary has little effect from your vote, with a third party even loosing has a positive outcome. By swinging the % higher (which you do wtih 50x more effect) you are sending a message even when you loose by raising the % enabling third-party more likely access, exposure, and chance to win in the future.

@LouisIngenthron

I would say the same about voting for a major party. In not a single election would your vote have changed the outcome, ever. So why do it?

Moreover, if we just look at the significance of your vote, you are a larger percentage of the vote when voting for a third party than when voting for a primary party. Something on the order of 50x **more** impactful when voting for a third party than a primary party in percentage of the vote you account for.

27 March at 23:59 | Open on qoto.org
Louis Ingenthron

@freemo The significance of a vote for a candidate that cannot win is zero.

So, a vote for one of the main parties is, by definition, more significant, even if it's literally one in a hundred million.

28 March at 0:01 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@LouisIngenthron

> The significance of a vote for a candidate that cannot win is zero.

That isnt the reality, and is a oversimplification to game the system.

You can argue it has a much LOWER chance of winning. but not 0... Based on historical data the chance of a third-party candidate winning an election or coming in second place (and thus becoming a primary party in the future) in any one year is ~7% , something like 3% for the chance of actually winning.

That isnt 0, it is low. But pushing for something with a low chance, that is far better for everyone, and having 50x the impact in doing so Is a very good trade IMO.

Also, what is the point of voting for a primary candidate when your chance of your vote having **any** meaning at all is 0.00000001%.. not voting would have no impact of any kind, so why bother, where voting third party has a 50x impact and even when loosing that impact has quantifiable gains (unlike with the major party).

@LouisIngenthron

> The significance of a vote for a candidate that cannot win is zero.

That isnt the reality, and is a oversimplification to game the system.

You can argue it has a much LOWER chance of winning. but not 0... Based on historical data the chance of a third-party candidate winning an election or coming in second place (and thus becoming a primary party in the future) in any one year is ~7% , something like 3% for the chance of actually winning.

28 March at 0:05 | Open on qoto.org
Louis Ingenthron

@freemo That 3% is an average driven entirely by major outliers. The bottom line is, without the right combination of external conditions in place, the possibility of a third party finishing first in a FPTP system is effectively zero.

Primaries have different systems, but those that are FPTP do have the exact same dynamics I described above.

28 March at 0:11 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@LouisIngenthron

> That 3% is an average driven entirely by major outliers.

So? Its still the reality chance of it happening, 0 is not. Full stop.

> The bottom line is, without the right combination of external conditions in place, the possibility of a third party finishing first in a FPTP system is effectively zero.

Yup, and the chance of those conditions existing in any one year, and you personally making a significant impact to allow that to happen is statistically **hugely** more likely if you vote for a third party than a primary. Primary the chance of your vote making a difference is many orders of magnitude lower than when voting for a third party.

So again regardless of who wins, why would anyone bother to vote for a third party when their vote makes no difference at all? When with a third party it does, at many orders of magnitude higher. Isnt the point of voting to make a positive difference?

@LouisIngenthron

> That 3% is an average driven entirely by major outliers.

So? Its still the reality chance of it happening, 0 is not. Full stop.

> The bottom line is, without the right combination of external conditions in place, the possibility of a third party finishing first in a FPTP system is effectively zero.

28 March at 0:16 | Open on qoto.org
Louis Ingenthron

@freemo
> So? Its still the reality chance of it happening, 0 is not. Full stop.

In a vacuum, sure. But in the real world, we can look around and see that those external factors are not present this year.

> Isnt the point of voting to make a positive difference?

No, it's to reduce harm. And by throwing away your vote for an impossible candidate, you give up your opportunity to reduce harm.

28 March at 0:23 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@LouisIngenthron Incorrect.. in fact not only are the factors present (a great deal of dissasifaction with major parties, and each party acting acts its majorieis primary ideals and interests)... but more importantly as I've covered before third-party take overs always happen suddenly and unexpectedly. They were **always** <1% support before the election and switch to a majority support over the course of only a single election.

> No, it's to reduce harm. And by throwing away your vote for an impossible candidate, you give up your opportunity to reduce harm.

How can you reduce harm if your vote has absolutely no impact on the outcome of any kind? Cant reduce harm if your screaming into the wind doing nothing.

@LouisIngenthron Incorrect.. in fact not only are the factors present (a great deal of dissasifaction with major parties, and each party acting acts its majorieis primary ideals and interests)... but more importantly as I've covered before third-party take overs always happen suddenly and unexpectedly. They were **always** <1% support before the election and switch to a majority support over the course of only a single election.

28 March at 0:26 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@LouisIngenthron @freemo So, by definition, if the major parties are not ok, the world is doomed and nothing should be done?

28 March at 0:29 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@admitsWrongIfProven

When Stalin and Hitler are up for election make sure you keep voting for Stalin, its the only way to make things better!

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 0:30 | Open on qoto.org
Reach for the Stars :verified:

@LouisIngenthron @freemo So my relatives who live in states where polls say Biden has no better chance of winning than a third party candidate should vote for Trump because "The significance of a vote for a candidate that cannot win is zero"?

28 March at 0:49 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@LouisIngenthron @freemo You are basically saying if the general environment says something, you cannot even try to resist.
There is always the option to renounce the powers that hold you, to deny their righteousness.

The narrative told is not automatically true. Sometimes, you just live in a world of lies. Embrace it. Call the people attacking you enemies. They cannot do any worse to you than they already do.

28 March at 1:22 | Open on qoto.org
Alan Miller :verified_paw:

@freemo @LouisIngenthron close races don't always happen but they're not that uncommon either. Cook County IL is still waiting to find out the winner of the State's Attorney primary that's basically going to decide the next office holder. There are regularly significant races won by a single vote both in primaries and in general elections, and in many places 'safe' districts mean that the primary is what decides things.

28 March at 0:16 | Open on infosec.exchange
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@fencepost

Name a single **presidential** race where a single vote from anyone ever in the USA has made a difference in the outcome? That has literally never happened and statistically if the USA lasted for ever that would never happen, the universe would probably die of heat death first.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 0:17 | Open on qoto.org
Alan Miller :verified_paw:

@freemo @LouisIngenthron presidential races aren't all that matters, and you'd need a race that was close enough electorally that a single state flipping would flip the electoral college AND where any of the states with enough electoral votes were very close.

I can give you one example you should be well aware of with a *very* slim margin (that ended up not mattering because of other highly questionable decisions). Want to take a guess first?

28 March at 0:28 | Open on infosec.exchange
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron Not to forget gerrymandering. So sorry to see what you have to deal with.

28 March at 0:28 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron You do realize you are arguing for anarchy and human cooperation here? Over people having power over others?

Agreeing would mean just that, only talking to each other free of any state or authority could help.

28 March at 1:39 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@admitsWrongIfProven

Anarchy as a distilled idea would not have voting. I think you are thinking of libertarianism not anarchy.

Yes I realize I lean most strongly towards libertarianism.

Human cooperation is just a fancy word for democracy, which I also approve.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 1:41 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron Libertarianism is strongly coopted by people trying to earn profit, not cooperate. Democracy is strongly coopted by people that are good at manipulating others.

The question of cooperation is if people can communicate freely. That is currently not the case. You do need to account for manipulation.

And anarchy is a slim slice of the topic, if an important one. It is often coopted by aggressive people, no aggression is ever anarchist. Just an excuse, then. Who works together with no force compelling, that is anarchist. If the force compelling arises, that is when anarchy breaks down and humans revert to their animal selves.

@freemo @LouisIngenthron Libertarianism is strongly coopted by people trying to earn profit, not cooperate. Democracy is strongly coopted by people that are good at manipulating others.

The question of cooperation is if people can communicate freely. That is currently not the case. You do need to account for manipulation.

28 March at 1:47 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@admitsWrongIfProven

Ideas cant be coopted.. thats like saying "being nice has been coopted by people trying to pretend to be nice by being evil, so you shouldnt proclaim you are nice!"... It makes no sense, you cant coopt ideas, full stop.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 1:48 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron Free speech means torturing turtles!

Now, what did i just do? Would this mean anything if 90% of people would associate torturing turtles with free speach? Is what i just did different from what i described as coopting?

28 March at 1:50 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@admitsWrongIfProven

And if you then say "free speech has been coopted by turtle torturers" would be you perpetuating their agenda.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 1:51 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron Exactly. Speaking lies has an effect.
This effect is working now, any many words are regarded as something else than intended.

Which is why free speech and communication are important. Clear up the lies. They will not go away on their own.

28 March at 1:53 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@admitsWrongIfProven

Of course speaking lies has an effect. Which is why you shouldnt perpetuate those lies and give them power by claiming such lies coopt an ideology. In doing so is what causes those lies to coopt the ideology. By not speaking of it and let it be ignored those ideas dont get spread.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 1:55 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron So you say ignoring lies is more powerful than clearing up what you meant, to specify?

28 March at 1:56 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

No im saying amplifying lies is free advertising for lies, so it causes small lies to snowball into big ones not from the people telling the lies, but from the good people advertising them in a vain attempt to control the narrative, paradoxically allowing the liers to ultimately control the narrative as a result.

What you should do is address the liers at the source, when you hear the lies you call it out to the people lieing and those around. What you dont do is after the fact announce the lies to everyone else, giving those lies exposure and amplifying them.

@LouisIngenthron

@admitsWrongIfProven

No im saying amplifying lies is free advertising for lies, so it causes small lies to snowball into big ones not from the people telling the lies, but from the good people advertising them in a vain attempt to control the narrative, paradoxically allowing the liers to ultimately control the narrative as a result.

28 March at 1:59 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron You are right in the arena you set, but i was talking about lies that are in circulation for a long time - completely different thing.

28 March at 2:00 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

The effect is just as relevant after they have been in circulation a long time. Afterall the goal is to reverse those lies and seek a state of truth again no matter how far gone it may be... You only do that by dismissing the lies, not amplifying them, and amplifying the truth to restore sanity.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:04 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron The difference is if it is established, ignoring it will not make it go away anymore. You need to take action or accept it then.

28 March at 2:06 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

Of course it will still make it go away. I mean when the lies started before the first lie the truth was 100% of the narrative. Despite this the lie being told and amplied caused the truth to "go away" (dwindle to a small minority)... So if lies can replace truth that is well established through these mechanisms why then can not the reverse be true? That once the lies dominate truth, if properly amplified, can cause the lies to go away?

Most processes in life are symmetrical, one thing we particularly struggle to understand in psychological contexts but is equally true.

@LouisIngenthron

@admitsWrongIfProven

Of course it will still make it go away. I mean when the lies started before the first lie the truth was 100% of the narrative. Despite this the lie being told and amplied caused the truth to "go away" (dwindle to a small minority)... So if lies can replace truth that is well established through these mechanisms why then can not the reverse be true? That once the lies dominate truth, if properly amplified, can cause the lies to go away?

28 March at 2:08 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron If what you say was true, there wouls still be a need to establish the counter narrative, thus a need to discuss it.

28 March at 2:09 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

No all you need to do is the exact thing that got the lies established... you scream and yell and talk about the truth, and dont put any attention on the lies... Let the truth be as notable, if not more notable, than the lies... thats all.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:11 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron If i was able to do that, it would not be a problem - what exactly do you propose to do to make the truth more notable?

28 March at 2:12 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@freemo @LouisIngenthron Look, all i mean to say is anarchy means people working together. As soon as anyone asserts dominance, it is not anarchy anymore. It's in the definition...

28 March at 1:58 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

No anarchy doesnt mean people working together.. it means the people who want to work together will, the people who want to rape kill and still and cause chaos also will. Anarchy is just capitalism in ideologically pure form (unregulated markets to the extreme) and nothing else.

Libertarianism, which is not anarchy, is the only thing that means working together while allowing the maximum individual freedom.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:01 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron I shall take your advice and not perpetuate this.

28 March at 2:02 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

Glad to hear it, and honestly I can probably due to take my own advice on this more as well

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:03 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron We all struggle. It's a good thing.

Only bad thing i see is probably something we would disagree on. People maximizing a number without regard to its significance.

28 March at 2:04 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

No we agree on that. My solution is to create a system where the significance of the number becomes more impactful and known so as to ensure there is strong penalties for anyone who blindly increases the number without understanding its significance

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:06 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron You are not clear on what the number is.

The number i see is money. I think this is misleading and not fulfilling.

One could try to create a number on human fulfillment. I have not seen anyone really try.

28 March at 2:08 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

I was perfectly clear on what the number is and knew before you said it what you meant...

You arent exactly subtle with your opinions dude :) lol

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:09 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron I misht not be sububtle, but you sure are. I still have no idea what number you mean.

It it was money, you would be stupid, as that is what i talked about. You are not stupid, so what is it? Very confused right now.

28 March at 2:11 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

I am not just subtle I am damn cryptic, and that is intentional. Telling people what I think wont do much good... leading people ona journey together where what I think is discovered through question, inquiry, and debate will. The problem is this requires the active contribution of the other party which rarely is the case as most people are looking to win, not explore.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:13 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron A generally good idea, but i think we lost the plot a bit here ^^

28 March at 2:14 | Open on qoto.org
🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 replied to admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

The idea that there was ever a plot to begin with is the illusion :) The only plot here was to learn something, and I'd say we did that quite nicely.

@LouisIngenthron

28 March at 2:14 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven replied to 🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

@freemo @LouisIngenthron It was a nice bout to be had. I searched for trolls on federated, i ended up bouting you directly. Probably better that way, the trolls get boring quickly with their obvious insecurities.

Until another day, it was nice!

28 March at 2:16 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven

@LouisIngenthron @freemo Are you saying all hope is lost and people should stop putting any hope in voting?

28 March at 0:27 | Open on qoto.org
admitsWrongIfProven
Artificial Stupidity

@freemo lol, political version of "No Name" brand :'D

28 March at 2:12 | Open on lor.sh
Go Up