Elections - Science topic

why are people in informal settlements the majority or perceived to be the ones that must vote in elections?

Have you ever read this article? They help to understand when exism movements like Brexit and Usexit should be expected to take power under majority rule liberal democracy thuinking

A point of view: Democracy has two faces both antithetical to each other. November 5,' 24 US election lends support to this view. A flawless election anointing a flawed man to the world's throne!

Donald Trump's re-election in the 2024 US presidential election will undoubtedly have a profound impact on the international economic and trade field. Trump's "America First" policy during his term and his tough stance on trading partners have caused trade frictions around the world. With his re-entry into the White House, what changes and challenges will the international economic and trade landscape face?

Muñoz, Lucio, 2017. Majority Rule Based True Democracy Under Complacency Theory: Pointing Out The Structure of Normal and of Extreme Democratic Outcomes Analytically and Graphically, Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 10, No. 8, October, La Paz, Bolivia.

Using present-absent effective targeted chaos and independent rule of law theory where the true majority view(T) competes with the true minority view(M) for access to power, the structure of two forms of liberal democracies and permanent authoritarianism can be stated as follows,

where

E = effective targeted chaos present,

e = effective targeted chaos is absent,

I = Fully independent rule of law system is present,

i = fully captured independent legal system = Fully non-independent legal system

Normal liberal democracy = NLD = (T.M)(eI)

Extreme liberal democracy = ELD = (T.M)(EI)

Permanent authoritarianism = PA = (T.M)(Ei)

So the question: Can you see how the structure of the death of liberal democracies can be stated in terms of effective targeted chaos and fully captured independent legal systems?

What do you think?

What does Donald Trump's re-election victory show us?

Is US society changing?

Can we attribute Trump's victory and his spectacular comeback to four years of failure by the Democrats (especially Joe Biden)?

This election is over and Trump is once again in the presidency, so have some of his statements helped America specifically? Well, in my opinion, it's a long term conservative development that will go a long way in helping people in the United States make money, and that's what the average person needs.

It has been more than 2.7 years and the Russia-Ukraine war still seems to have no end. Now the Republicans have won the US General Election. From an international relations point of view, what could be the future of this highly tensed situation between the two countries?

Simultaneously now what is the US strategy toward supporting the ISREL war with Gaza, Hamas, and other surrounding countries?

Discussion are open for an open debate for the research community, or the person having a keen interest in International Relations.

According to my data (DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15992.66567 (PDF) Correlations between primaries results and space weather indicators across the United States in the first quarter of 2024. Accident or pattern?), high Kp values ​​are associated with blue and low values ​​with red. What is your opinion?

After reading an interesting article Wallace J, Goldsmith-Pinkham P, Schwartz JL. Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Intern Med. 2023;183(9):916–923. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.1154, I rethought my old results. Help me confirm/reject one of the hypotheses of my Citizen Science research. I am not a political scientist and I admit that my results may be the result of a methodological error.

You have seen the comings and goings now of Trumpism, Brazilianism, and Brexism, 2016 to 2024 and the common theme is why they failed to persist in power ONCE THEY CAME TO POWER. You have seen the direction that exism movements take towards permanent authoritarianism. And you may be familiar with the environment in countries with permanent authoritarianism.

If you look at the evolution of democracy theory since 2016 paradigm shift from normal to extreme liberal democracies in some countries you and you adjusted your previous democratic thinking as now EFFECTIVE TARGETED CHAOS and THE NATURE OF THE COURT SYSTEM IN A CONJUNCTURAL CAUSALITY MODE play a key role. And you compare this environment to the one found in countries UNDER permanent authoritarianism you may see some similarities in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions for them to keep power for ever between the structure of permanent authoritarianism from within and well as from outside.

If you take into account this, then you may be able to see that the necessary and sufficient conditions for permanent authoritarianism to stay in power for ever using this new thinking has technically not changed, it is the same before 2016 and it is now in 2024..

And this raises the question: What is the necessary and sufficient condition for permanent dictatorships to remain in power regardless of opposing democratic movements?

What do you think the necessary and sufficient condition is?

Note: The answer is short.

Are you concerned about the future of democracy, locally or globally?

What do you think the fundamental lessons learned for democracy are since 2016 BREXIT?

How can we come out with a permanent shield for the continuation of democracy regardless of type of future threat?

Perhaps they coincide with my thinking.

The question is: What are the 3 fundamental lessons learned from facing exism movements and dictatorship threats 2016-2024?

What do you think?

The answer should be short as my answer is short.

Note: I am currently putting these ideas together in one article.

If you understand what is the necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements like Brexism, Trumpism, Brazilianism.... to persist at all cost in power once they have power are within a liberal democracy under independent rule of law system you should not be surprised by ideas like USA Project 25 to come up as once exism players realized why they can never be in power for ever inside the democracy they are born into they will try to, if possible, proactively, create the conditions for staying in permanently in power once back in. And this raises the question: Should ideas like USA PROJECT 25 be expected to come up in places where exism movements came and went like in the UK or Brazil in the future?

I think Yes, what do you think?

Exism movements since BREXIT 2016 have been described as driven by emotions leading to the idea of Emocracy/Emocracies, but as the social discontent that is usually displayed after exism movements a kind of unexpectedly come to power as traditional democratic thinking is inconsistent with their coming shows is the true majority reaction/true emotions to the realization that the unexpected by the true majority actually has happened. So there are true majority emotions and true minority emotions and targeted chaos is directed at both with different goals, one to reduce the size of the true majority voting power by any means and the other to keep the true minority engaged and overdrive by any means...,Hence, we have the idea of democracy driven by emotions and the other idea of democracy driven by targeted chaos,....And this leads to the question, Why is effective targeted chaos more than emocracy?

Perfect democracy thinking assumes no chaos so no need for independent rule of law system and liberal democracies assume the possibility of normal democratic chaos that can be sorted out by an independent rule of law system.

So when rethinking democracy we have to think now about normal chaos, targeted chaos, and effective targeted chaos affecting voting complacency under an independent rule of law system so we can explain both the coming and going of normal and extreme democratic outcomes within liberal democracies in terms of normal and extreme democratic outcome competition....,

And this raises a key current question that was made relevant by the coming and going of 2016 Brexit/Brexism and 2016 Usexit/Trumpism:

You see some democratic countries since 2016 Brexit failing to deal proactively to avoid or reactively to neutralize internal democracy threats like local exism movement or deal with external democracy threats like permanent authoritarianism and temporary authoritarianism or the cooperation of authoritarianisn. In 2016 perhaps Brexit came as a surprise because of knowledge gaps in democratic theory, but maybe 2016 Trumpism should not have been a surprise as THE SAME PLAYBOOK was at play, and this should have been a wake up call to traditional democracy theory based thinkers to adapt liberal democracy thinking to absorve to the coming new liberal democracy landscape where normal democratic outcomes are competing for power, no longer against other normal democratic outcomes as before 2016, but AGAINST EXTREME DEMOCRATIC OUTCOMES.

It seems in the UK, in the USA, in Europe as a whole, they have been treating extreme democratic outcomes as either normal democratic outcomes or abnormal outcomes without probably realizing that if certain conditions are met, extreme democratic outcomes can become long term temporary authoritarianism periods, and if some other especific conditions are met, democracy will end and extreme democratic outcomes will become permanent authoritarianism. The liberal democracy landscape changed in clear ways in 2016 yet democratic countries keep running the system the same way as they did in the past giving space to exism movements not just to materialize by to gain power. And this raises the question, relevant to all democracies and democratic thinkers: The rise of effective target chaos in 2016 and the failure for democracies to adapt and deal with it, how are they link to exism movements?

Pir Hassan Ali Shah call for information about the US election poll on social media like X and WhatsApp Channel.

Search Image of Pir Hassan Ali Shah on US election 1

What happens in the US affects the world, local, and international community. Pir Hassan Ali Shah conducts a live poll on his Pir Hassan Ali Shah X account and the Pir Hassan Ali Shah WhatsApp channel.

What was Trump views on the UK, China, India, and the UN? What if Trump wins? How do people react in the world? How will Trump win? What is Trump plans? What was Harris doing when Trump did live TV? How to rig a US poll? What is Harris plan now at this time? What to do to stop Trump?

Who will win US elections?

1) Trump

2) Harris

 

Does anyone has this article called 'A Post Racial Era: How the Election of President Obama and Recent Supreme Court Jurisprudence Illustrate that the United States is Not Beyond the Centrality of Race'

https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/srebwsude4&div=5&id=&page=

I found it on Google Scholar, but I'm only allowed to view the first page, please!!!!

Exism movements after gaining power within liberal democracies under majority rule and independent rule of law system become permanent dictatorship threats, but why this is the case is not clear yet apparently neither to politician's pro and contrary to exism movements, and this raises the question: Why do exism movements once in power become permanent dictatorship threats within liberal democracy thinking under majority rule and independent rule of law system?

What do you think is the reason why?

Elections are often repeated, usually after several years, but sometimes also after several months. Some mature democrats strongly oppose a repetition of a referendum. Why? Why do they repeat elections?

It seems to be back to square one with Brexism, Brazilianism, and Trumpism....They came and they fell in ways away from how traditional democracy theory and thinking works....I wrote since 2016 how extreme democratic outcomes can come out, how they will behave once in power and how they could persist or fall, how important effective targeted chaos is and how important the independent law system and morality is together with predictions/expectations given whether or no targeted chaos is effective or not within an independent rule of law system and majority rule.... If what happened to Brexit July 2024 is consistent with what happens in the USA in November 2024, then the outside the box theory may have several validating points. And this raises the question: Does the fall of BREXISM, Brazilianism and Trumpism mean we know when they come and when they fall in theory and in practice?

What do you think?

Any ideas?

You have seen the comings and goings now of Trumpism, Brazilianism, and Brexism, and the common theme is why they failed to persist in power ONCE THEY CAME TO POWER. If you look at the evolution of democracy theory since 2016 paradigm shift from normal to extreme liberal democracies in some countries you and you adjusted your previous democratic thinking as now EFFECTIVE TARGETED CHAOS and THE NATURE OF THE COURT SYSTEM IN A CONJUNCTURAL CAUSALITY MODE play a key role you may be able to see that the necessary and sufficient conditions for extreme democratic outcome to come to exist as temporary authoritarianism is different than the necessary and sufficient condition binding to persists under reelections at all costs and become permanent authoritarianism.

And this raises the question: What is the necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to become permanent authoritarianism from within liberal democracies?

What do you think the necessary and sufficient condition is?

Note: The answer is short.

You have seen the comings and goings now of Trumpism, Brazilianism, and Brexism, 2016 to 2024 and the common theme is why they failed to persist in power ONCE THEY CAME TO POWER.

If you look at the evolution of democracy theory since 2016 paradigm shift from normal to extreme liberal democracies in some countries you and you adjusted your previous democratic thinking as now EFFECTIVE TARGETED CHAOS and THE NATURE OF THE COURT SYSTEM IN A CONJUNCTURAL CAUSALITY MODE play a key role.

If you take into account this, then you may be able to see that the necessary and sufficient conditions for normal liberal democratic outcomes to come to exist and persist has changed as conditions have changed.

And this raises the question: What is the necessary and sufficient condition for normal democratic outcomes to maintain power regardless of the coming and going of exism movements and dictatorship threats?

What do you think the necessary and sufficient condition is?

Note: The answer is short.

Has both positive and negative implications

Dear researchers,

I am working on the conceptual metaphor POLITICS IS WAR and would be grateful if you could suggest some mininarratives of a war scenario in political discourse.

Best regards,

What role does regional cultural identity, shaped by geographical location, play in shaping political affiliations and election outcomes?

Give precise answers

Thinking of the Elections coming up worldwide in 2024

Having lived in Pretoria for a few months, I recognized the significant potential in South Africa, particularly through its decades-old infrastructure, and its ability to influence other African nations positively. I've been closely monitoring the political landscape since 2012, when I decided to travel there, and have observed notable developments. The African National Congress (ANC) lost its majority in Parliament in the 2024 elections after a 30-year reign. This event offers several critical insights and has extensive implications for both South Africa and the continent. The results showed ANC leading with 40%, followed by the Democratic Alliance with 21% and Jacob Zuma's MK party with 15%. The EFF, led by Joseph Malema, garnered less than 10%. Despite these figures, ANC factions, including the EFF, MK, and other smaller parties, still represented a significant force, though divided on issues like land and tribal affiliations.

Key lessons from this election include the importance of long-standing political parties remaining accountable to their electorate. The ANC's defeat highlighted the need for transparency, the implementation of anti-corruption measures, and good governance. Factionalism within the ANC likely contributed to its electoral losses by alienating many voters. Moreover, enduring socio-economic issues like poverty and inadequate public services have undermined trust in the ruling party, emphasizing the necessity for addressing these problems to retain political support. The shifting demographics, including younger and new voters, demand changes and have different expectations from their leaders, indicating that political parties must stay relevant and engage with these groups actively.

The end of ANC's dominance suggests a shift towards a more competitive political landscape, which could enhance accountability and inspire innovative policymaking. New leadership might introduce changes in economic policies aimed at reducing unemployment, improving education and healthcare, and stimulating economic growth. Furthermore, a change in leadership underscores the importance of democratic processes and the role of institutions in protecting democracy. However, transition periods can be unstable, and it is vital for new leaders to manage these changes cautiously to avert social unrest.

There was widespread social discontent/protest in the UK in 2016 after Brexit/2016 and in the USA after Trump/2016 after their exism movements won the democratic contest under effective targeted chaos.

The same has happened in other countries where liberal democracies under majority rule have produced an extreme democratic outcome since 2016, the latest case is ARGENTINEXISM/2023.

And this raises the question: Murphy's law remorse and widespread social protest/discontent after exism movements/extreme democratic outcomes come in to power: Are they linked?.

What do you think?

If you think that they are linked why do you think so?

If you think they are not linked why do you think so?

Note:

In recent years, more and more different political options during election campaigns before parliamentary and other political elections have added to their election slogans the issues of sustainable economic development, green transformation of the economy, increasing pro-climate and pro-environmental policy measures, including a significant increase in the development of renewable energy sources, decarbonization of industry, development of sustainable organic agriculture, sustainable energy-efficient construction, electromobility, recycling, development of sustainable tourism, development of urban agglomerations in accordance with the concept of green smart city, significant increase in the scale of reclamation of natural environments in areas degraded by industrial development, increase in the scale of protection of biodiverse natural ecosystems, natural forest ecosystems, increase in the scale of reforestation and other aspects of a sustainable green circular economy, and after winning the elections, they only slightly implement their election promises to citizens, or do not implement these promises at all. Since the scale of this phenomenon is growing so the importance of the discussions held in the issues of not fulfilling election promises on the issues of sustainable economic development, green transformation of the economy, increasing pro-climate and pro-environmental policy measures by the political options winning the elections is also increasing. When this kind of situation is repeated repeatedly in a certain country then citizens begin to consider the possibility of recognizing this kind of unreliable political activity as antisocial and perhaps also not in accordance with basic human rights and the Constitution.

I am conducting research on this issue. I have included the conclusions of my research in the following article:

I invite you to discuss this important topic for the future of the planet's biosphere and climate.

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

An article by Francis Fukuyama (FT Weekend) asserts that the above organisation claims a decline in quantity and quality over the past 18 years. He points the worst example as United States. Surely we can all agree with this? Liberal Democracy is at a crisis point. Right wing politics of a sinister kind prevails, conspiracy theories have pushed away fact even for intelligent Americans.

A third of the American electorate believes the studiously false claim put about by Trump that Biden stole the 2020 election. Voters are prepared to back Trump who made a filmed assault on Capitol in 6 2021 to keep himself in power. This event effectively altered American politics. Is American politics becoming putinised or were problems already visible? Did Americans get tired of being powerful? Is democracy energy consuming?

I work on a comparative study related to professional standards in the announcement of the results of election research and public opinion surveys. I am interested in whether there are such standards (requirements) about the methodological information that is publicly available from such studies in different European countries?

As all of you may know, we can take the experience of Trumpism(November 2016-January 2021) in the USA to explore questions such as when a democratic contest can lead to partial and permanent authoritarianism. The failure of the USEXIT/Trumpism to persist by losing reelection means that we just witness temporary authoritarianism, but it could have been worse as one more step was needed to move towards permanent authoritarianism in the USA and the lost of the most relevant normal democratic system in the world. Which raises the question, When can permanent authoritarianism take hold under majority rule liberal democracies?. Any ideas about what the missing step was to transition from temporary to permanent authoritarianism in the USA in 2020. Feel free to share your ideas.

What is the propensity for authoritarian regimes to use quazi-democratic institutions, such as sham elections, stacked legislative bodies, etcetera, to undermine the public's confidence in democratic principles, thereby averting opposition?

I would like to know if is there a percentage of invalid votes that could make the elections be deemed null, by consider it unacceptable, given a high percentage of those invalid votes.

If invalid votes percentage is very high, it would seem that there are many people unhappy with the system itself. What is then, or what should be the effect of a high percentage of invalid votes?

For example it seems that, in some places, if the invalid votes are more than 2/3 of the valid votes, then the election is considered unacceptable.

I think yes, what do you think?

Please share your own ideas.

Every citizen supposedly has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. Hence, the demands for a credible, free and fair election cannot be ignored. What are the elements of a free and fair election? Sharing is caring. Thanks.

Reginald Oduour explains that prior to Western Imperialist incursions into Africa, many peoples therein had consensus-building (not majoritarian) political systems. Today, there is a huge emphasis on elections and many people seem to be under the illusion that democracy parses with election/voting. How do we break electoral majoritarianism's spell?

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/how-elections-stifle-democracy-in-kenya/

If you look carefully as how exism movements like Trumpism or Italianism or Brexism or Brazilianism come to exist under majority rule based democracies, they all need the same conditions to exist,....without this condition they can not come to power....

which raises the question, what is the necessary and sufficient condition for an exism movement to come to exist under majority rule based liberal democracies?

What do you think?

The recent American election has brought Trump to the fore again, a man under investigation for his last term in office, and throughout the world autocracies have climbed to the forefront, some run by known criminals.

In addition, autocracies, according to Acemoglu and Robinson in Why Nations Fail (2012), advance poverty. Are we going backward, not just to more war?

There is a necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to come to power under majority rule based democracy and rule of law when competing in elections; and there is a necessary and sufficient condition for exism movement to lose power when going through reelection.

Exism movements like Trumpism, Brexism, Brazilianism and Italianism came to power under the same condition to gain power; and both Brazilianims and Trumpism lost power when seeking reelection under the same condition to lose power, Trumpism fell in 2020 and Brazilianism fell in 2022.

And this leads to the question: Under majority rule and the independent rule of law, what is the necessary and sufficient condition for exism movements to lose power?

What do you think?

This is an academic question, please provide your own comments, not third party comments

Hello,

I am looking for papers that talk about short term thinking in democracies/elected politicians. I remember reading something in democratic theory about this a long time ago which argued that elected politicians can be short term in their decisions because they need to win the next election and need to please people now. I am reading Stephen M. Gardiner's book The Perfect Moral Strom and he applies this argument to why Western democracies have failed to take action on climate change (The costs of climate action are mostly felt by the present generation and most of the cost of climate change are felt by future generations). My question is have people done empirical studies of this to see if politicians are short term in their thinking and what are some good essays in democratic theory on this? Thanks in advance!

Modern politics is characterized by many aspects which were not associated with traditional politics. Big data is one of them. Data mining is being done by political parties as they seek help from data scientists to arrive at various patterns to identify behavior of voters. Question is, what are the various ways in which big data is being used by modern political parties and leaders?

I am currently interested in election studies and would like to read more, specifically from a book, that could explain the determinants of election outcome. please recommend me some book.

Thank You!

Can any one name existing and under planning use cases of BlockChain Technology?

Like

1) Electronic voting in literature it is available but does it really exist

2) Banking Gross Settlement  like RTGS

3) Cross border payments

4) Supply Chain

We need a Global Wealth Tax How rich are the rich relative to the poor? If they had ten times the wealth, no problem. It has always been that way. But what if the ratio was a million to one? That's undemocratic power. You know when democracy has gone. Elections become a sham, and leaders become increasingly incompetent, dishonest, and corrupt. Sound familiar? The existence of just one billionaire -- a single person with the wealth of a thousand millionaires, or a million workers with $1000 each -- is a sign that democracy is on the way out. We now have 3000 billionaries, including three smiling centibillionaires (Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg). A centibillionare has the wealth of 100 billionaires or 100,000 millionaires. Capitalism may have its pros and cons, but this is getting ridiculous. If we want our democracy back, we have no choice but to reduce the wealth of the wealthiest. If we want peace, we have to do that gradually and fairly. In a word: democratically. Don't despair. It can be done. Big changes have happened before. Our main task is to think clearly and tell the truth.

Richard Parncutt

I am currently working on a study about vote-buying culture through comparing voting behaviors in local, regional, and national level elections.

All suggestions and recommendations are invited.

The coming of exism movements in 2016 led to the coming of extreme democratic outcomes within majority rule based liberal democracies like in the USA.

And this brought a change in the nature of democracy as it has led to a shift from true democracy thinking to temporary democratic authoritarianism thinking.

We are probably familiar with the structure of the forces competing for power in a true democracy, I think. but not with the forces competing in a temporary democratic authoritarianism system. Which raises the question, what is the structure of temporary democratic authoritarianism? Any ideas?

Feel free to express your own views so we can exchange ideas in a positive academic environment as this is an academic question, not a political one.

I Intend to take this assignment through Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis framework

I believe that efficiently conducted marketing online campaigns in social media can already increase the insensitivity of new online media, including social media to traditional communication channels. Effective marketing campaigns on social media before political elections may already have more than 50 percent share. How big it will be depends on the technological possibilities in the field of new online media for a specific electoral staff that is active during the election campaign.

Please, answer, comments. I invite you to the discussion.

I am interested in doing a quantitative analysis of voter turnout in multiple Canadian student unions (a sample size of about 80). Elections in these organizations are held annually. Would three election cycles (for example, 2019-2021 elections) be a long enough study period for an article or should I include more years in the analysis?

There are academic reasons that support the idea that Trumpism can not just move on as a normal democratic would do if it loses an election, and there are reasons for it. So the question, why?

Any ideas!

Once extreme democratic outcomes like Trumpism come to exist they must behave autocratically as their model structure, including the political and legal loyalties structures that they needed to persist, are the opposite as those of the normal liberal democracy model inside which extreme democratic outcomes came to exist.

Then when time for re-elections comes for extreme democratic outcomes, there is the possibility of winning or losing if playing the normal liberal democracy way, but there is the need to win at all cost if playing the extreme liberal democracy way.

Which leads to the question, what is the sufficient condition for extreme democratic outcomes like Trumpism to win re-elections or persist in power at all cost? Can the absence of this condition sufficient condition explains why Trumpism failed to persist in 2020?

Any ideas? Please share your own ideas in order to exchange ideas.

Keep in mind; this is an academic question, not a political question as I am a scientist, not a politician.

OK so I have conducted a pretty standard GARCH (1,1) analysis on  the S&P 500 using the US volatility index return (VIX) as an independent variable in my mean equation. For my conditional variance independent variables I have used political electoral opinion polls volatility % daily change throughout the campaign and have left VIX out of it.

My goal is to find out whether political volatility is a significant explanatory factor within the SP500 volatility during election periods.

I have run the programme on STATA and am getting some weird results (see attatchment) including negative, large coefficients and large standard errors.

For the life of my I cannot see where I am going wrong?  Should I be running a different model? If so which one (BEKK, EGARCH, GARCHX)? Or are my results actually OK given that my alpha and beta parameters are sound and most of my P values are significant?

Once the campaigning is over, the election is done and results are out, one of the competing parties goes on to win the election. Question is, whether the governance of the incumbent could be seen as an extension of their campaigning carried out during the election and if it is indeed the case then what about the party which loses the election? 

Elections, not just voting, can become trustworthy.

Additional methods to the ones that made voting trustworthy (choose your favorite) can be applied. Eiections are not used to choose the captain of a ship, said Socrates, 2500 years ago. One can use technology to help. One has to verify competence, reciprocity, and (for fairness) anonymity.

Although voting is deterministic (all ballots are counted), information can be treated stochastically using Information Theory. Error considerations, including faults, attacks, and threats by adversaries, can be explicitly included. The influence of errors may be corrected to achieve an election outcome error as close to zero as desired (error-free), with AI providing many copies of results without voter identify. A voting method to do so, is explained at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286459956_The_Witness-Voting_System

How about the next step, fair elections? Can one learn from the events in the US in Jan/6?

The Hulu production ‘Harlots’ highlights how during the 18th Century, aristocrats would often disregard the law (which they implemented and had enforced on their subjects) in their lust for power by abducting young maids and then would have their way with them such that the rape culminated in the death of the women all for some seconds of orgasmic pleasure. “This is fiction!!!”, you say. If you consider what has been happening at the House of Windsor over the last century you might be more credulous. Here we have a case of a young Princess Diana deceived into marriage so that the Royals could continue their bloodline. The princess, often confined to her bed-chamber (once she gave birth to the children), eventually had a mental breakdown that led to her death all while her prince charming committed repeated infidelity. In a like manner, we have another Royal, Prince Andrew, the much beloved son of Queen Elizabeth, caught with has ‘pants-down’ fraternizing with pubescent girls in the company of the late Jeffry Epstein who as an insurance policy against anyone who planned to report on his illicit operations on his Island of Pedophilia, video-taped all the rich and famous who indulged in those activities with him. What all these stores have in common is having unlimited funds to support an unchecked lifestyle.

Now to Donald Trump. If you look at the history of this man, he employed his vast sums of money (presently estimated to be around 2.4 billion dollars by Bloomberg News) to commission a bevy of lawyers to succeed at victimizing individuals who cannot come up with a comparable sum of money to win in court. He picks his victims strategically. When he was accused of raping an underaged girl with Jeffry Epstein in the state of New York in 1994, the girl—later as an adult and apparently of modest means—never put forth an effective prosecution in 2016 (Case 1:16-cv-07673-RA). In a like manner when Trump refused to pay individuals for the construction of Trump Tower in New York or for the running of his businesses most did not have the means to fight him in court (US Today June 9, 2016). Trump has a long history of using the American court system to his advantage, knowing that by simply pushing more money, a rich person often overcomes the defenses of a poor person. Even when he loses in court, as he did for running a fake ‘Trump University’, he has the means to manipulate the media such that his followers concluded that he is indeed a master deal maker as underscored in ‘The Art of the Deal’ and promoted in the TV series ‘The Apprentice’ which propelled him to the presidency.

The methods used by Donald Trump to corrupt the results of the 2020 election is much in keeping with the forgoing precedent: use the court system even when the chips are down since in the end—even if defeated—one will have the opportunity to contaminate the minds of the entourage, which now number in the tens of millions and which includes prominent Congressmen, that the 2020 election was stolen, a distortion of fact that will then be used to pave the way to the next deception, which always seems to replenish his bank account. So far, Trump’s followers have contributed over 170 million dollars to his ‘election fraud’ scam. The only way to end this contemptible behavior is to put him away much like what has been done with Al Capone, Anthony Salerno, Ivan Boesky, El Chapo, and if he had not taken his own life, Trump’s partner in crime Jeffry Epstein.

Targeted chaos and misinformation are at the heart of extreme democratic outcomes as they are the active ingredients needed for them to come to exist, to persist, and to propagate. One example of extreme democratic outcome is USEXIT or Trumpism.

Targeted chaos and misinformation are mostly based on fake facts or an alternative facts, which raises the question “Are extreme democratic outcomes when in conflict and the rule of law in liberal democracies incompatible?

I think yes, what do you think? Why do you think so?

Donald Trump and his challenger Joe Biden have presented vastly different visions for handling crucial issues, from the coronavirus pandemic to climate change. This results in how the election could shape many "Science" or "the scientific implications of Climate Change" issues.

Under normal liberal democracy there is war between several views on how to advance the common good either at the expense of the minority(e.g. traditional liberal democratic parties) or at the least cost possible to the minority(e.g. traditional liberal conservative parties). ...War here simply means " a usually heated conflict between competing ideas....".

In normal liberal democracies, science plays a central role, and if science is not followed or it is partially followed or it is ignored completely and things go bad, the opposition party will use that rational in the next election and the incumbent party may spin the reality, but the buck stops there…and the people decide at election day….

I can see several reasons why that is the case, which leads to the question, Which are the central links between extreme liberal democracy and authoritarianism/dictatorships?. Can you see them? Or What do you think?

Dr. Anthony Fauci, a respected US epidemiologist, said two things that might be useful for us to take into consideration.

1. Do not expect a medical solution to Covid, as a treatment or vaccine, until February 2021.

2. We have not yet seen even the beginning of the infection toll.

With that perspective, the current Covid problem is long-term and will be with us in the environment for a long time, even when it is treatable. It has no reason to follow the US election calendar. Favorable mutations may change this picture.

Your comment?

If you have successfully taken a water bear from a petri dish under a stereo microscope and prepared it for Scanning Election Microscopy, how did you do it? I pipetted this water bear from a petri dish into a vial of 91% isopropyl alcohol, and it made it shrivel up.

Last weekend millions of Poles went to the ballots to vote in the presidential election. The election was in many ways a crossroad for Poland, will Poland go down the road of liberalism or continue down the road of conservatism and nationalism? Will Poland rejoin the European family of nations or will they be the travel companion of Hungary on a path towards further nationalism and isolation?

The implications of this elections are many and most of them are related to issues such as the future relation to the EU, the independence of the judiciary, independence of the press and in the long run, perhaps even the future of Polish democracy. I wrote an article on the subject that was published and syndicated in news outlets across Africa and the Middle East and I will share it with you, in case you are not familiar with the subject, I received many comments and questions from readers so I thought it might be an interesting debate. The article can be found here.:

https://www.somalilandsun.com/poland-the-presidential-election-and-the-eu-is-democracy-dying-in-poland/

What are your thoughts about the future of Poland, the EU and the issues laid out here in this text? The words is free..at least for now.

Best wishes Henrik

Hello. I am writing a research paper on municipal elections in Saint Petersburg. The recent elections of 2019, according to observers, were held with a large number of violations. In my work, I try to check this. But I have some questions. If I understand correctly, the elections are held using the “Multiple non-transferable vote”/Block Vote system. In other words, the voter can choose up to five candidates from the entire list, and the winners are those who received the highest number of votes in all precincts. Are there any countries with such a voting system, and open data about elections? For example, in Russia, it is possible to view data on each specific polling station where elections were held, for example, how many votes were cast for candidates, how many ballots were issued, etc. Could you recommend literature specifically about this voting system?

I am running a multivariate logistic regression to predict the likelihood of individuals voting for the green party, using a survey of european election studies of 2019. My main IV is education levels; when I add other explanatory variables, there are significant. However, my classification table (as shown below) shows that my model cannot predict anything; I have tried using other IVs to see if that could be the issue but, as I thought, it is not. I do not know how to resolve it; or can I simply state in my report that the goodness of fit of the model is simply not so good?

I would like to understand why this is happening and if there is a way for me to resolve it?

Modern politics has witnessed the anvil of the dual concepts of political branding and political marketing which have played crucial roles in such political events like elections, specifically, the campaigning aspect of it. Question is, how they differ from each other? The difference ought to be highlighted with regard to the practical implications arising out of the two and not merely the theoretical one.

Political branding has been a phenomenon which has come to characterize the campaigning associated with an election in modern politics. Question is, apart from an election, where else does the concept of political branding find traction in the scheme of a political party and/or leader?

For a class I'm preparing to teach, I'm looking for (estimated) data on the numbers of U.S. citizens who engage in political activities beyond voting, such as

1. volunteering in campaigns,

2. contributing to campaigns,

3. working as election officers at the polls on election day,

4. contacting legislators, and

5. commenting to agencies about proposed administrative rulemaking.

In my work, I consider candidate positioning in the election. I've got 35 of districts with 2 or 3 candidates in each one (overall, there are about 90 candidates). I want to scale these candidates to show their positions on some map. On each candidate, I gather textual data (from social media) that contains from 1000 to 20,000 words (one candidate = one document).

In most of the articles about party positioning, I've seen that the most popular method is MDS. But later I was told that this method for text analysis is a kind of outdated for sociologists, and they rather use t-SNE for text analysis. Then, I found PCA, LDA, and other methods, and now I'm confused.

What method is most suitable in my case? Thank you in advance!

It seems good that after two terms in office, the president leaves the office for one term. But I do not consider good not to allow that person to run for president ever again. American citizens should be given the opportunity to choose between Mr. Trump and Mr. Obama.

Under normal democratic outcomes(the majority view wins the democratic contest) or normal liberal democracies, traditional conservatism is against big governments, bail outs, social welfare, deficits.....because they are seen as benefitting the majority...what traditional conservatives see as bad socialism...

-

The 2016 coming of USEXIT/an extreme democratic outcome(the minority view wins the democratic outcome) or extreme liberal democracy indicates that there has been a shift from traditional conservative thinking to flipped conservative thinking in the USA, as now things that were bad such as bail out such as the bail out of famers or increasing deficits are okay...like good socialism.

-

And this raises the question: Is flipped conservatism at the heart of extreme democratic outcomes like USEXIT/Trumpism?

-

What do you think?

It has been widely felt by those dealing with the affairs of Britain and USA that the two most prominent events of last year, namely, Brexit and the USA Presidential Election has resulted in much alienation on the part of these two major economies thereby creating an image which is of being less friendly to the outer world. Question is, the present trend is here to stay or would it give way to a better situation in future?

South African elections have ushered in a new thinking on the role of social media in influencing elections. The EFF had the highest number of young people who where on social media. ( 6 million) and they did not register to vote. these votes would have swayed the election in favour of EFF but sadly they did not vote.

What does this mean?

I pursued my doctoral work in the domain of political branding in the context of a developing democracy, India. During my work, I conducted an empirical analysis to establish the relationship between political branding and political participation and other related concepts. The findings of the study do indicate that such a relationship exist, that is, political branding influences political participation. However, the relationship the other way around, that is, political participation influencing political branding left things to be desired. Also, the role of social media, which is quite hyped in an event like an election, was not found to be much as far as influencing voting preferences was concerned. All this got me thinking whether the efficacy of political branding could be similar in a developing democracy like it is in an advanced democracy? 

Now that election results in Spain are known, do you think there will be a change in Spanish policy, and what will be the effect on European countries and the rest of the world.