this is a bit old (2003?) and limited, but someone's attempt at doing this analysis...
http://politics.beasts.org/scripts/eigenvectors On 10/10/20 12:02 AM, Steve Smith wrote: > > > >> It is the first principal component.. > > Agreed, but is that a feature of our winner-takes-all voting system? > Do we *like* having our lives/livelihood reduced to such? Do we have > a choice in letting this projection of a "properly complex > life/value-system" onto a pair of polarized political parties? > > >> >>> On Oct 9, 2020, at 8:40 PM, Steve Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> I agree that the illusion of there being only the single axis of >>> Left/Right is a travesty. >>> >>> I also intuit that my own preferences for ranked-choice-voting to >>> *allow in* more dimensions may be naive in some way I don't fully >>> apprehend. >>> >>> I'd love for you (and others) here to explore the paradoxes and >>> inconsistencies implied in all of this. >>> >>> On 10/9/20 9:18 PM, Eric Charles wrote: >>>> --- reconfigure (expand) it from 9 to 15 but >>>> *balance* the Left/Right ideology (I think he proposed 5/5) and >>>> then --------- >>>> >>>> Note that one thing both parties agree on is that we should >>>> conceive politics as utterly and completely a choice between the >>>> two of them. God forbid that we conceive of judges using any other >>>> dimensions. In fact, let's enshrine it in law that we must forever >>>> focus on exactly whether we have a "balance" of "left" and "right". >>>> Ugh! >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:48 PM Steve Smith <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Ha! I refer to the last bit as "ok fine, TWIST my drinking >>>> arm!" when >>>> someone offers to buy me one... the only one to twists my >>>> drinking arm >>>> this last six months has been Mary... and Maybe Stephen and his >>>> circle >>>> on "ZoomGrappaNight". >>>> >>>> I don't like the language around "packing the court". I don't >>>> think >>>> "reconfiguring the court" is the same as "packing the court". >>>> Clearly, >>>> the (not so) loyal opposition to the Dems *would* pack the >>>> court... add >>>> 6 more justices and make sure they are ALL conservative >>>> leaners. Pete >>>> Buttegeig was the first to speak of this in my earshot, and HIS >>>> version >>>> sounded pretty reasonable... reconfigure (expand) it from 9 >>>> to 15 but >>>> *balance* the Left/Right ideology (I think he proposed 5/5) and >>>> then >>>> leave it to the Justices themselves to fill the remaining 5 >>>> (through >>>> some arcane process?). What the Republicans have been >>>> building up to >>>> for decades is "packing the courts". >>>> >>>> Checks and balances are tricky, as is depending on social norms and >>>> standards, but I think it might be "as good as it gets", at >>>> least for >>>> the time being. >>>> >>>> - Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/8/20 1:36 PM, uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ wrote: >>>> > Ha! That was the essence of one of the 538 panel member's >>>> phrasing suggestion for Kamala Harris in response to Pence's >>>> question about packing SCOTUS. The elaborated version was: >>>> "Because confirming Barrett, NOW, is such a horribly wrong >>>> thing to do, we have no choice BUT to pack the court." ... I.e. >>>> now look what you made me do. That was my dad's favorite phrase >>>> to justify whatever abuse he chose to mete out that day. He >>>> once ran over my bicycle with his truck. I *made* him run over >>>> my bike because I left it laying in the driveway. It's a >>>> running joke with my fellow drinkers who *regularly* FORCE me >>>> to drink more than I should. There is no free will. I live to >>>> serve. >>>> > >>>> > On 10/8/20 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >>>> >> Look what you made me do, >>>> >>>> >>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>> <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> >>>> un/subscribe >>>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>> <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> >>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>>> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> >>>> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>> <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> >>>> >>>> >>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> >> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
