Hacker News

points by arjie 1 day ago | 0 comments

Votes that lose by a large margin have no information. They’re commitment free actions taken purely for political gain. Narrow wins are the only ones where you can really learn something.

If everyone else is voting for some necessary evil, it frees me up to vote against it while still wanting it.

[–] uxp100 1 day ago

I think that effect still exists on small margin votes too. You know pretty much how it’s goona go down on every vote. 99-1 feels a little different to me. That no one else even wanted to claim that lane.

[–] arjie 1 day ago

Yeah, I think narrow wins are the only ones you can count on. Those require participation. Otherwise it’s all local constituency branding.

[–] ordinary 21 hours ago

Then why not 2 no votes? Or 3? Hell, even 95-5 is functionally equivalent to 99-1. And as others have pointed out: being the first to go against universal consensus is a lot harder than being the second or third. Even our leaders are often followers. And yet, no other senators decided to be part of that small group, which suggests to me that Feingold did do something worth noting and that we should remember.

[–] w0de0 1 day ago

Hardly true. Have you never tried to be the lone dissenter in a crowd? Make that crowd a nation.