fustakrakich's Journal: Do not conflate voting with betting

Place your vote on the person you would most like to win.

Place your bet on the person you think most likely to win.

For me it has never been the same person. Statistically my vote doesn't count or exist.* Some people like to use this little fact to project a false image. In a similar fashion the betting parlors can project a false image of a "desire" for a specific candidate. No, it is merely a prediction.

*My bets fare better, at least I break even

People fail

[smittyoneeach]

Vote for principles you think most enduring, as expressed by some bloke or blokette on the ballot.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

I try to vote for people who can practice the principals I'm after. (good luck with that, with civil rights being in such low demand) And if they fail, I make a point of not voting for them or their affiliated institution for a 2nd or 3rd time. It is based on logic, not attachment

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Right, so: who do you vote for after the purity test eliminates everyone?

Re:

[fustakrakich]

It never does. There's always fresh meat.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

But the meat is always sinful. Always.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

And? That sounds very defeatist.. Are you saying, *Why bother trying*?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Well, there is Good News, but you have to accept it.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

I always accept good news, when it is factual, not vapor...

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

No amount of factual information, such as is exists, can preclude your capacity to label it "vapor". The Good News just doesn't work that way.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Nice try. Now look in the mirror when you say that. Pix or GTFO :-)

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

As you underscore my point.

You forgot to note the other differences ...

[BarbaraHudson]

Place your vote on the person you would most like to win.
vs.
Place your bet on the person you think most likely to win.

Two completely different questions, from where I sit, and kind of hard to conflate the two. One is about your preference for the outcome, the other about your prediction of the outcome.

Just sayin' :-)

Re:

[fustakrakich]

I'm using democrat voters as the example of conflation. There are real alternatives to the bullshit, but people are compromising their votes with the "lesser evil" nonsense. Their rationale is the "chance of winning". Their "prediction" is a preference. Their bet is their vote. So we are left with a monolith. There are no independents in the American Congress. The one that is labeled as such is a democrat, but uses the label to keep real independents off the ballot in his state. The voters could circumvent

Re:

[BarbaraHudson]

Well, we're getting proportional representation for our next federal election, and all I can say is it's about time.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Keep your expectations low, and you won't be disappointed. You'll still have all the bickering and collusion, with more musical chair elections to shift things around.