Vote Pairing

[Slar]

I stumbled across this site today, and I think they have a good concept. From the FAQ of Votepair.org (http://www.votepair.org):

"What is vote pairing?

Through Vote Pairing, Green Party members, Independents, Libertarians and others sympathetic to the David Cobb, Ralph Nader and Michael Badnarik candidacies in swing states register their personal decision to vote for Kerry-Edwards while Democrats in safe states register their personal decision to vote for Cobb, Nader or Badnarik. After a participant enters his or her home state and candidate preferences, he or she will then be "paired" with another progressive voter to give everyone a vivid personal glimpse of how this big political coalition is actually working. Votepair.org (http://www.votepair.org) allows paired partners to contact one another directly (by email or other means of communication) to engage in a more detailed political dialogue. This can also provide an opportunity for participants to feel comfortable that others have joined the alliance in good faith."

If their system works, I can switch my vote for Michael Badnarik with, say, a Kerry supporter from Texas. I get my vote for support for third-party politics, and they get their vote for Kerry where it really counts. Check it out.

[keyst2891]

Sounds neat...

Also sounds a little suspect. I mean, isn't part of voting to vote YOUR mind?

I understand what they are trying to do, but if this would ever get going on a larger level, people would be buying and selling votes and swing states would be pummeled with voters voting other people's choices from other states that have other issues in mind. Very questionable.

I think this, in the long run, would bring more bad than good. Think about the ramifications of this.

Oh, look Candidate #1 is trailing by 5% in Ohio... Get on the phone and find third party or on-the-fence voters and trade votes!!! Pretty soon financial rewards would be secretly given and it would be back to the good ole days of the 1900's where political parties just bought and sold elections.

It's a long shot, but I can see it happening

[Slar]

I see your point, but we have a flawed system to deal with right now anyway. The idea of the electoral college was to keep candidates from stumping only in densly populated areas. Now the opposite has happened, and candidates only stump in "swing states." Therefore persons that are in a "safe state" are essentially left out of the process (eg: voting for Bush in any of the New England states).

I see this as a way to vote YOUR mind, in a way that will count the most. Check out the FAQ of the site, and that may answer some of your concerns.

[Sovrana]

This sounds familiar. Didn't a number of people participate in this effort in 2000?

[BigSugar]

Originally posted by Slar
I see your point, but we have a flawed system to deal with right now anyway. The idea of the electoral college was to keep candidates from stumping only in densly populated areas. Now the opposite has happened, and candidates only stump in "swing states." Therefore persons that are in a "safe state" are essentially left out of the process (eg: voting for Bush in any of the New England states).

I see this as a way to vote YOUR mind, in a way that will count the most. Check out the FAQ of the site, and that may answer some of your concerns.

please tell me that your deluded view of the historical nature of the electoral college is a just a joke........seriously. i mean, that may have been an "effect", but the founders were just a little more forward thinking than that......i'll let you find out the real reasons and report back to me......i'll then grade you again. Right now.......F.

[keyst2891]

Originally posted by Sovrana
This sounds familiar. Didn't a number of people participate in this effort in 2000?

If I recall... a person stood up in one of my classes at the time and told us about it before a class started. I thought the same thing about it that I just stated above:)

[Slar]

Sorry Big Sugar, but I'm an American Voter, and I don't really have to know anything at all about the electoral college. Perhaps if you could ask the same question in a nicer way I might be tempted to look something up. I don't respond well to condescening know-it-alls.

In the meantime, I got paired with a Kerry supporter from Utah. He had just about given up on votepair, and was surprised to hear something this close to the election. The timing was good, as he was going to be out of town on election day and was actually voting on the same day I contacted him. I got my vote for Badnarik in Utah, and still get to support Kerry here where it can actually help.

I mentioned this around the office to some people yesterday too, and another guy signed up for it too. He had never had intention of voting third-party, but still wanted to support them if he could.

[Homsar]

I thought the original purpose of the Electoral College was that there weren't enough informed voters to make an informed decision.
Of course now that may seem a little outdated, as our dissemination of information is much, much improved.
And wouldn't a change in vote out there make THAT state a close call too? I think it's a bad idea overall.

[despondent]

I'm voting for Badnarik because I strongly dislike Bush AND Kerry, so I wouldn't want to trade and cast a vote for a candidate that I didn't like.

[vivalamusica]

Originally posted by Sovrana
This sounds familiar. Didn't a number of people participate in this effort in 2000?

There was a site back then called NaderTrader that was essentially the same thing. I think I remember hearing that it was possibly being investigated for violating federal election law, but can't remember any details.

[Docta]

ha, i sent this to a libertarian friend and he said he would have considered it but then pointed me to here (http://badnarik.org/press/release.php?p=1510)

damn his ideological morals! 8-)

[dcXhc]

Originally posted by vivalamusica
There was a site back then called NaderTrader that was essentially the same thing. I think I remember hearing that it was possibly being investigated for violating federal election law, but can't remember any details.

As long as their is nothing of monetary value offered in exchange for a vote, no federal election laws are broken.

One of the big sites in 2000 was taken down because the server was located in California, which may have a state law against vote trading, or perhaps they simply promised to make things difficult for the guy hosting the site.