Several questions to the entire audience of Unity08: How will the convention be organized, and to the detail. The earlier post by one of the founders said the following:
Unity08 will hold the first-ever online presidential nominating convention and of the United States right here. Long before the Spring 2024 convention we will welcome candidates from either Party (or independents) to run for the convention nomination. We will allow them to campaign right here at Unity08.com – with streaming video of their positions on the crucial issues, with their own daily weblogs, with online debates among the candidates, and presentations of their platforms. For the first time ever we’re going to require that the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates run as a Unity Team – one Republican and one Democrat, in whichever order –or an independent running with a Unity Team from both parties.
On each convention ballot each delegate will vote for one Unity Ticket (just as Presidents and Vice Presidents are elected as a team in November). There will be as many convention ballots as are needed until one Unity Ticket wins at least 50% of all delegates voting.
It goes on about a Rules Committee, which I do not know yet whether we are allowed on it or not. So I am asking some people to sumbit some rules for the procedures of:
1) Rules on Unity08 Campaign
2) Committee on Party Platform
Thanks, can't wait for some responces!
From an actual voting perspective, the most interesting development I'm seeing is that of instance runoff voting (IRV) and contingent voting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contingent_vote
From wikipedia: "Instant-runoff voting (IRV) (also known as the Alternative Vote and by several other names) is an electoral system used for single winner elections in which voters rank candidates in order of preference. In an IRV election, if no candidate receives an overall majority of first preferences the candidates with fewest votes are eliminated one by one, and their votes transferred according to their second and third preferences (and so on), until one candidate achieves a majority. "
In a normal vote system, people are sometimes traped into voting for their second or third option, if the "popular opinion" is that only this candidate has a chance of winning. This is easily seen in the calls of "Ross Perot contributing to Bill Clinton's victory" and "Ralph Nader contributing to Al Gore's 'loss' to George W. Bush"
With instant-runoff voting you can vote for your most prefered candidate without taking votes away from second and third choices. If your first choice get's eliminated, then your vote goes to your second choice candidate, and so on until a winner is decided.
IRV is a viable alternative to the "choosing the lesser of two evils" that our current system has created. It has been used at the state and local level for some time, and is actually the method of voting employed in the Irish presedential elections.
While I'd love to see something like this utilized in the National Elections, perhaps it could at least be a usefull method of selecting the unity08 candidates at the online convention.
I read the article, sounds good!
I read it also. Love the idea.
Different voting systems obtain different voting results. An online election provides other appraches. Online voting can be tallied incredibly fast. Therefore the voting could be done repeatedly. This would have the advantage of allowing candidates that did not win to endorse, for some candidates to withdraw, etc. over, say, a 24 hour period. Ranked voting selection can have, under some circumstances, some odd outcomes. To a certain extent these can be avoided by limiting the ranking to a few ranked top picks. Otherwise one can obtain, in some circumstances, a candidate that is very well liked by a sizable minority, but mildly to extremely disliked by everyone else. This does not engender high voter turnout.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sketch
Some issues to consider:
How to ascertain whether someone is a US citizen at least 18 years old and legally registered to vote.
How to prove that someone voting online is who he says he is, and only votes once.
I have always thought that I liked dirty adverts and mudslinging the best. Just a second before you jump to conclusions. If a campaign is competitive and opponents clearly state the down side of their opponent, then I as a voter get the full picture and can feel more secure in my selections. I think we need more confortation and mudslinging .. not less. Just a comment.
What does "an independent running with a Unity Team from both parties" mean? That sounds like THREE people. I know that can't be, so can someone please explain.
It means that their are a few on this blog that still dont get it. They think you can combine the celebrity of 2 corrupt candidates from 2 corrupt political parties and some how the situation will get better. Its nonesense. Hopefully, the better minds will prevail.
I think a good first step would be to stop thinking that everyone and everything is corrupt. I don't consider myself a republican or a democrat, and I'm register as "non-affiliated", but there ARE people I respect from both sides of the party line.
Sure corruption is rampant in washington, and polarizing politics has brought the machine to a grinding halt, but I still think we can find some hope in both the republican and democrat parties.
With that said, I'd love to see a qualified politician embrace the "independent" platform and really stir things up.
tolas on June 11, 2024 - 7:13am
"but there ARE people I respect from both sides of the party line."
OK tolas, I will bite. Name two .. just two and Ron Paul doesnt count?
Ahh putting me on the spot with a name like "Anonymous" huh. Great!
Well... on the left I like Dennis Kucinich and Barack Obama (am I too trendy?), and on the right I've always respected Colin Powell as a rational intelligent voice.
It may be easy to criticize these choices for whatever reason, but the fact remains, I think there are people from both sides of the political fence who are honest and rational in their thinking, and are looking out for what's best for the American people. You may just have to dig a little deeper to find them.
- tolas
It would appear to me that your idea of a rational intelligent voice is someone who talks "snice", pretends to be a friend of the poor, and feels with his heart. No thanks - the free world needs better.
OK, Dennis Kucinich marries Colin Powell .. then what? Whose on top?
your posts are the most rational and intelligent on here, and yet you are so easily baited by the trolls. What gives? do you really think it is worthwhile engaging someone posting as 'anonymous' who claims everyone on both sides of the isle is corrupt? ignore these guys and they eventually go away.
Unity’08’s primary goal must be to have completed our convention before the Iowa Caucuses. Or inbetween the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary.
If our candidate is not already polling competitively against
the field of primary candidates, it will already be too late
to build faith that we can win.
Ok tex, you name two uncorrupted solons. Either party. Just two. That should be simple of someone of your opinions.
John,
I agree. The convention should be in November of 2024, for four reasons:
1. More time to build up publicity and be competitive, as you suggest.
2. More time to secure ballot access in all 50 states.
3. Unity08 would have the political headlines to itself if it got the jump on the primary season.
4. To prevent sabotage. Suppose the Democratic and Republican candidates are determined early on. What would then stop millions of supporters of one of those candidates from crashing the Unity08 open convention and selecting a Unity candidate calculated to hurt their opponent more than their candidate?
Whereas, I am also interested in the discussion of what "Independent with a Unity team" means, I think that this line of discussion has brought us way off the topic. Let's get back to suggestions for the rules of the online convention. IRV does sound interesting, and it actually reminds me of an election process that I have taken part in on a number of occasions that not only works well, but in most instances results in a 2/3 majority--which shows substantial unanimity. Personally, I'm a little ambivalant toward the notion of a Unity 08 team only receiving 50% of our own votes. It would seem to me that we would provide our candidates, and ourselves, with greater legitimacy if the winners were backed by a solid majority. So, here's my suggestion:
This procedure uses mutliple ballots to arrive at a winner--usually with 2/3 of the vote. All the teams are put forth and voted on. If the first ballot doesn't result in a 2/3 majority winner, then a second ballot is conducted. If after the second ballot, there is not a 2/3 majority winner, then all the teams with less than 1/5 of the total vote are automatically withdrawn, with at least the top two teams remaining, and a third ballot begins. If after the third ballot, there isn't a 2/3 majority winner, then all the teams with less than 1/3 of the total vote are automatically withdrawn, with at least the top two teams remaining, and a fourth ballot begins. If, after the fourth ballot, there is not a 2/3 majority winner, then the Chairman overseeing the balloting process asks for a vote to conduct a 5th ballot, which passes or fails by a simple majority. If the motion is defeated, then the remaining teams' names are placed in "the hat", which in this case can be a random number generator, which is assigned a number corresponding to each team. The team with the number that is selected by the random generator is the winner. If the motion for a 5th ballot passes, then the ballot is conducted and the team with 2/3 of the majority is elected--otherwise, we go to "the hat".
I know what you're thinking: "The hat?! Are you kidding?" In my experience, this balloting system rarely gets to the 4th ballot at all, and if "the hat" has to be used, then the winners are much more likely to enjoy the full support of the electorate, because it is understood by all involved that electing (or in this case nominating) leaders with a sharply divided vote provides them with neither legitimacy, nor authority. Trust me, this system works, and works very well; and everyone can feel free to vote on their first choice at the outset of the balloting process.
I think that is an excellent idea. A 2/3 majority should solidify the belief that the people behind Unity08 will support their candidate through election day. The question remains: How long between ballots? The candidates that are dropping out should have the opportunity to address their supporters. And the remaining candidates should have time to attract the now open votes. And how could we organize the web site to accommodate this? (And be sure that the sight can handle the traffic)
In a live situation, where this method is typically used, the removal of candidates comes immediately after each ballot, and then the next ballot commences. Also, candidates are not allowed to address the electorate during the balloting process, but these are two different situations, and I suppose it would be reasonable to expect to hear from those being removed from the ballot to make a quick statement, possibly endorsing one of the remaining teams (but that may open a whole new can of worms, and could be a source of manipulation that may taint the process). In terms of allowing time for the remaining teams to attract the open votes, I'm not certain that would be necessary. After all, if the Unity 08 site is going to allow a full blown campaign, then the delegates should have all the information they need to prioritize their votes before the balloting begins. I can say that this has never been a problem in my experience. Now, organizing the site is probably the biggest challenge. If addressing the delegates throughout the balloting process is to be allowed (which, again, I'm not sure it should be), one frame of the site could be a live chat room. This chat room could also serve as a message board from the Chairman overseeing the balloting process. Another frame could then serve as the actual ballot. This is where things can get sticky. Those running the site itself would have to be on the ball, removing names from the ballot and refreshing the page after each vote. If this isn't feasible, then some time may be required between ballots, which can be determined ahead of time, depending on how long such a refreshing process could take. The results of each ballot should be almost instantaneous, so ultimately, I don't see where this could take more than a few hours. I'm not well versed in handling site traffic, but I would hope that the masterminds behind Unity 08 have already thought of that issue when they decided to have an online convention. One person that Unity 08 may want to consult on this issue is Joe Mohen, who was the CEO of an Internet company called election.com (which I think was bought by Accenture a few years ago). They were in charge of the first legally binding online election, which was Arizona's 2024 Democratic Primary. Having already been through the process, it seems likely that he would be able to answer a number of these questions. Also, my guess is that with the Arizona election behind him, he also has learned what works and what doesn't.
I am surprised to see anyone advocating that the choice should be made in the fall of 2024. If Unity08 petitions itself onto the ballot as a new party, then the petitioning could be done before the ticket is chosen, and the ticket could be chosen after we know who the Dems & Reps will be running.
I'm not sure why it is that so many people are under the impression that Unity 08 is trying to create a third party. The explanation of what Unity 08 is trying to do in the "About" section couldn't be clearer. Also, there have been numerous postings on this site by other members stating again and again that this is not a new political party--that it is a gathering of moderates from both major parties, and independents, who wish to work together in the middle instead of fighting each other on the extremes. The matter of getting the Unity 08 ticket on the ballot is mentioned in the FAQ's: "The millions of Unity08 convention delegates would be organized to get that job done, state by state."
Also, the reason why we're starting this process so early is because we have to. If we wait until after the Democratic and Republican conventions, we will be much less likely to have garnered support from the large numbers of people needed to pull this off. The two major parties are already floating their picks for 2024 around--there's no reason why we should just sit and wait.
We are talking about a Convention to nominate leaders and candidates to be put on the ballot in 50 states by the Uniy08 Coalition/Party/NonParty.
Proceedures and Rules the putative subject of this Shout must follow:
Our Purpose (for the convention)
Our Goal (what do we want the convention to achieve?)
The Machine (netbased mechanism to achieve the two objectives above)
Purpose must come first before goals.
I would not restrict the implementation to 2024. Indeed one of the great strengths of Unity08 may be the ability to build a consensus among activists early and begin the process with nominees as early as possible (Spring 07).
We have every opportunity to build a fully inclusive set of processes.
1. We should certainly consider different voting methods and requirements for the Agenda for Change (aka platform). a 51% based on count (i.e. you do not have to vote for every Agenda item thus increasing your effect on the items you choose to vote for).
2. Candidates should be chosen in the end by a majority of 55%. Sketch's example of a person chosen because he was least disliked by the majority fits a perfect description of Lincolns candidacy in another new party a century and a half ago.
This is online nothing has to be done overnight or even over year. No one is inconvenienced by the venue!!
Our freedom to work across long periods of time is one of the main strengths we must exploit to distinguish our Unity08 process.
Patience Net is what sets us apart and opens the door to broad participation and a new democratic paradigm.
Okay, I see the logic of choosing a candidate after the Dem and Rep candidates are known and before their conventions.
How then does Unity08 keep supporters of the Dem and Rep candidates from crashing the vote and keeping our best candidate from winning, or giving us a candidate calculated to split the left or right vote and help the Dem/Rep candidate win?
Perhaps a registration cutoff of Dec. 31, 2024, should be set for delegates, although that might cut down on the participation levels somewhat...
Absolutely do not wait for the demo/cans to act! ET it together with registered voters asap.
Let's build an ongoing caucus and convention that lasts through the summer and peaks in the fall of 08.
Get our Agenda in place and elect candidates. Continue to revise and refine both Agenda and Candidates until we have a winning combination as reflected by the polls that will voluntarily surround our activity.
Do not worry about spies. As long as they are registered voters they can and should be able to take over Unity08 if they are a majority of the US citizen registered voters participating in any vote.
THAT's THE WHOLE IDEA ALL THE US VOTERS ARE THE DELEGATES