Best elections books according to redditors
We found 55 Reddit comments discussing the best elections books. We ranked the 29 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
We found 55 Reddit comments discussing the best elections books. We ranked the 29 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
I doubt Ben realized Email for Dummies is real, he just wants to go for potshots because Hillary is a dummy with EMAILS.
That said, since Ben Garrison is aware of the "...For Dummies" series, I'd like to recommend him this book, and this one, and of course this one.
One more important reform that I wish more constituents would push is the end of the filibuster. The reason why I believe we'll need a pseudo one-party state to have an effective government is because Congress cannot do much as it is, and as it and society in general becomes more polarized, the inertia will only deepen. The other solution would be to get more people to vote, so that second-order elections and especially primaries aren't controlled by ideologues. But that's a far more difficult problem to solve!
Anybody who wants to read more about this should check out Stephen Wayne's book Is This Any Way to Run a Democratic Election?
He's not a Hillbot but he loathes Bernie Sanders with a white hot rage. He wrote an entire book about it.
>My apologies. This is the link from Dublin.
Republican Sinn Féin are a political party not a terrorist organisation, regardless of how scummy they are. They might support the cause of terror organisations but they are not doing anything illegal. Plenty of pro-violence political movements parade around the UK with heavy police presence. Nobody gives a toss about the RSF, they're a bunch of cosplaying armchairists.
> I'm afraid it's clear you have no idea who runs Sinn Fein. Its leader's campaign office used to sell IRA memorabilia, and she herself is a outspoken fan of Sean Russell, the pro-Nazi IRA leader. Her deputy Michelle O'Neill is the daughter of a convicted Provo and hails from a well-known IRA family.
I know well who runs Sinn Féin. I have little time for her. But if you think that people vote for Sinn Féin because they like Mary-Lou, then you are mistaken. It's like saying people will vote Tory because they love Teresa May. People vote Sinn Féin because of their deep involvement in highly localised politics as they are the only surviving left-wing political party in many parts of the country. Irish politics is not about national politics and people do not vote in local candidates in order to form a national government- they vote local candidates for the work they do in the constituency. Mary-Lou and indeed much of the awful crap that Sinn Féin involved themselves with in the last number of decades has little bearing on why many vote for them, especially when your options in many parts are Fine Gael (centre-right, pro business), Fianna Fáil (centre-right, pro banking), or independent (usually centre-right, pro farming).~
Once again, you don't understand Irish politics. This is a very good explainer for those who don't get Irish politics:
https://www.amazon.com/All-Politics-Local-Elections-Ireland/dp/1848890028
> I apologise that the British government of the 1700s wasn't as enlightened and "woke" as the modern government of Denmark or Canada. Perhaps you can give me some examples of 18th Century governments that were?
It's not just the 18th century. It's the 19th and 20th centuries too where the British government committed awful acts in the name of imperium.
> Most people in England suffered quite badly at times.
Certainly.
>We had our land stolen by invading Normans (like Ireland)
Certainly.
>endured centuries of brutish monarchy (like Ireland and the rest of Europe)
Certainly.
>had our common land stolen by aristocrats in the Enclosures
Certainly.
> saw Dickensian hardships in the Industrial Revolution
Certainly.
>and then (unlike Ireland) lost a million people trying to stop German military dictators from conquering Europe
Irish fought in both World Wars. Irish soldiers were also treated worse than British soldiers in the British Army.
>But Irish nationalists pretend none of that it true, because in their fictionalised view of history, it's only the Irish who ever suffered.
That's also untrue depending on what you mean by nationalists. By the same token British nationalists pretend that the British Empire was a beneficial, fatherly state that raised savages out of mud huts, and spent it's existence fighting autocrats. In reality the British government genocided Bengalis and Irish in artificial famines, actively hunted out practitioners of other faiths and cultures, and sought to eradicate them. This isn't just hundreds of years ago- by the time of Irish Independence, people who had survived An Gorta Mór were still alive.
Look man, I don't know why you have such a chip on your shoulder about Ireland. It's clear your conception of Irish people is based on Northern Irish nationalist lunatics but people from Ireland have a simultaneous fondness for Britain and British people while having the wherewithal to acknowledge the atrocities of the IRA and the historic and recent atrocities of the British government. That the British government actively hated the Irish is a matter of fact, that they felt Ireland would be better if the Irish were gone altogether is a matter of record, and that eradicating Irish culture and replacing it with Anglo culture is a matter of evidence. Whether the British people suffered under British governments is not up for debate, they did. That doesn't diminish Irish suffering, never minding how much more sever Irish were treated compared to British, nor does it make the independence movement less valid nor justified.
I'd like to go back to your original statement before this somewhat bizarre laundry list of petty Irish crimes was raised (and again I will not write a laundry list of major British crimes) and address the assertion that Irish Independence was brought about in 1922 by lying Nazi socialists and a fascist organisation that was founded 15 years after we were already independent and I'd like for you to ask yourself, for all the attempts at independence, for every historical uprising and every rebellion and every war crime and atrocity that was committed against the Irish (and not to say some of it wasn't committed against English people by the selfsame government) and for every political attempt at devolution and Home Rule and every political battle that ended whole careers of sympathetic British politicians for centuries and decades leading up to Irish Independence in 1922, do you really and truly honestly believe that people had to be lied to in order to support Independence?
After this, I'm done. I haven't said all I can say but I've exhausted my patience. You appear to have made up your mind. I just hope some other people read this exchange and realise there's more subtlety to this than how it may be presented by some.
Believe it or not, there are books that can help you.
Start here:
https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Dummies-Ann-DeLaney/dp/0764508873
Looks like a really good book.
Go here and watch some videos. This channel has playlists for US history (which you will need to know to understand politics) and civics/government/politics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yK90u3DQIK0&list=PLSQl0a2vh4HAmesA2mzILc6gghrr4jl5L
yep, sure.
https://www.amazon.com/God-Gave-Donald-Trump-anti-establishment/dp/1947402544
I'm not sure I'm getting through to you, son. I'll try one last time. The left is being hypocrites about Trump pulling troops out of Syria. They've wanted to pull out troops from Syria for a long time. Trump did it. They should be happy but aren't because Trump. They obviously think it's the correct move due to their defiance of their beloved president who deployed the troops in the first place.
It's pretty straightforward. I might suggest some intro reading if you're still confused because that's as plain English as I can lay out for you, sorry.
I highly recommend that you read Demosclerosis
To be clear, I'm not trying to get by on technicalities, I'm not saying the post should be un-removed or anything. I just am trying to understand your logic in removing it.
So ... the source has to be reputable (according to who?) ... and it has to have been around for some time (how long?) and it has to have a Seattle-related slant (determined how?).
Also, surely you must realize that starting to talk about a local issue in a non local venue such as /r/politics inherently makes it less likely that i will be able to have such a discussion, yes? Further, I don't care what the entire audience of /r/politics thinks about the issue. I only care about what the denizens of /r/Seattle think about the issue. Thus is and was my reasoning for originally making the post.
PS: The issue I've brought up is not /only/ a US federal-level issue. The whole idea of the thing is that it has to start via grassroots. IE in local municipalities.
You may have heard of such ideas as 'All Politics is Local', (independent example): http://www.amazon.com/All-Politics-Local-Other-Rules/dp/1558504702
Also I am not downvoting you. I do not know who is.
I read Robert Bothwell's The Penguin History of Canada recently, thought it was great. An example: the 1967 "Vive le Quebec libre" incident.
Some other books I've enjoyed:
Closing tax loopholes and generating revenue are functionally indistinct, but youre otherwise spot on. A gradual accumulation of government handouts, impossible to get rid of once they're put in place, has slowly eroded our government's efficacy and its solvency. Johnathan Rauch called it demosclerosis.
There's an interesting chapter in this book about that survey and public opinion:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sex-Lies-Ballot-Box-elections/dp/1849547556/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1425402914&sr=8-1&keywords=sex+lies+and+the+ballot+box
They basically talk about studies that show that while people's actual grasp on the numbers is quite poor, there's a direct link between what's delivered and public opinion on that thing - so for example, if education spending increases, the percentage of people thinking more needs to be spent on education decreases. One of the things they mentioned was unemployment - people were way off on what they thought unemployment was, but if you plot the proportion of people who in surveys responded saying that unemployment was the greatest issue over time, it follows very closely the official unemployment figures over the last 40 years.
The point is that NO, we do NOT, have ALL the emails. Why do you think that very many anxiously await the next release of deleted or destroyed emails. The source of this data is insignificant.
The point is that the American people want and need to see the text, the content, of said email. I for one want to see and read the grand schemes that were authored by HRC, her hubby and so many other friends of theirs. The messenger is just delivering the news.
Please read this if you care to, and want to be open-minded in order to really analyze and consider the thievery that the Democratic primary was.
http://collectivelyconscious.net/articles/5-outrageous-examples-of-voter-suppression-in-the-arizona-primary/
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/arizona_secretary_of_state_confirms_fraud_during_primary_vote_20160401
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/voter-disenfranchisement/
https://shadowproof.com/2016/04/19/closed-new-york-primary-helps-democratic-party-maintain-status-quo/
https://34justice.com/2016/04/22/the-new-york-primary-was-a-shtshow-heres-why/
http://ivn.us/2016/05/16/independent-voters-disenfranchised-by-california-primary-rules/
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/06/gaius-publius-puerto-rico-democratic-party-reduced-primary-votes-to-8-of-what-was-expected.html
https://medium.com/@linneahanson/dnc-corruption-2016-7adccf13b11a
http://reverbpress.com/politics/chicago-election-audit-observers-video/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/smoking-gun-approximately-15-of-bernies-votes-were-flipped-to-clinton-in-california/
http://www.amazon.com/Matrix-Deceit-Forcing-Pre-Election-Fraudulent/dp/1480077038/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1351564528&sr=8-1&keywords=matrix+of+deceit
http://www.amazon.com/Proving-Election-Fraud-Uncounted-National/dp/144908527X/ref=pd_sim_14_3?ie=UTF8&dpID=51brrMiMIOL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR107%2C160_&refRID=0VGAMWY0W8SH3NCFJRTK
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/is-democracy-dead-in-california_us_5772c94fe4b04650f1505de2
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-brasunas/only-voter-suppression-can-stop-bernie-sanders_b_9780128.html/
https://www.amazon.com/Proving-Election-Fraud-Uncounted-National-ebook/dp/B005W2FFYC?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc
http://www.amazon.com/Mark-Crispin-Miller/e/B001IU4XLI/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7W7rHxTsH0
http://www.gregpalast.com/section/articles/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--Db2kbs67M
https://medium.com/@tonybrasunas/exit-polls-are-the-thing-wherein-to-catch-the-conscience-of-elections-a5a3f5eaef20#.41gqofpdv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45kvSgr-8eo
http://www.inquisitr.com/3207171/election-fraud-study-points-to-rigged-democratic-primary-against-bernie-sanders-video/
http://www.inquisitr.com/3210377/wanted-bernie-and-got-trump-harvard-study-says-blame-the-media/
Sorry Milt, no Conspiracy here, the truth is that HRC and her friends stole the primary in plain sight. To say otherwise is akin to trying to cover the sun in the Arizona heat at high noon and to say and pretend that it is dark out.
https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Chaos-Candidate-American-Unraveling-ebook/dp/B01LY37O02 Lance Walnau wrote a great book about this during the campaign
> really awesome
Only to those with very limited understanding of electronic voting and trustworthy computing. See Broken Ballots for background. In short, there are fundamental issues that cannot be overcome on today's PCs as they are so trivially easy to compromise. Once a PC has been compromised, there is absolutely no guarantee that it casts a ballot as intended, or that it casts a ballot at all.
In Estonia's case, blind eye has been turned to these issues in the name of PR. There's no substance behind all the hype.
>>Julia Gillard: Former Australian PM claims there is 'genuine concern' over Donald Trump’s mental health
>Random left-wing politician calls Trump crazy. Front page news.
That's just a really poor example. Exactly who she is and what relevance she has is presented in the title.
There are plenty of good examples to choose from, but that's just not one. Serving a term as the leader of a major Western nation makes one more than just some random politician.
>>Donald Trump’s pick to investigate voter fraud, Hans von Spakovsky, was once called source of ‘the voter-fraud myth’
>There appears to be little foundation to the title beyond "another liberal reporter said this once". Nonetheless it's a hit piece.
I'm going to have to ask that you stop making me come to the defence of the Indepedant, because that's kinda a terrible example as well.
A major portion of Hans von Spakovsky's career has revolved around voter identification, just look at that overview. Approving and advocating for a photo ID law in Georgia which was subsequently overturned as unconstitutional, opposing the re-authorization of the Voting Rights Act in 2006, his "inability to recall" his involvement in the aforementioned ID law during his confirmation hearing.
And if all that shit weren't enough, feel free to order up a copy of his book, in which he openly and explicitly makes exactly those kinds of claims.
Yeah.
There's actually a book on this topic, iirc it was called Demosclerosis, and it was supposedly (haven't read it myself) how civilizations fail as government becomes more complex because of continued expansion, which ultimately results in an inability to respond to a disaster situation, eg economic, natural, etc., when they arise, resulting in the destruction of that civilization. Or something to that effect.
https://www.amazon.ca/Demosclerosis-Silent-Killer-American-Government/dp/0812926323/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1474740487&sr=8-1&keywords=demosclerosis
Actually, I think it may be this book The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joseph Tainter
Also the effect of creating an irrelevant barrier to entry for other businesses to meet the demand for said business.
Typical prog-think though.
Abramson, Aldrich, and Rohde's Change and Continuity in the 2008 and 2010 Elections (or just the 2008 version, which is available for super cheap used) might be worth reading. Some sections are 2008/2010 election-specific, but they also cover some more general topics, as well as trends in turnout, issues, and voting blocs that have been taking place in recent years.
I'm not sure if I'd be more disappointed if the people upvoting this article did so based on the title or actually read the article and thought it was worth upvoting.
Here are all the local Amazon links I could find:
amazon.co.uk
amazon.ca
amazon.com.au
amazon.in
amazon.com.mx
amazon.de
amazon.it
amazon.es
amazon.com.br
amazon.nl
amazon.co.jp
amazon.fr
Beep bloop. I'm a bot to convert Amazon ebook links to local Amazon sites.
I currently look here: amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.ca, amazon.com.au, amazon.in, amazon.com.mx, amazon.de, amazon.it, amazon.es, amazon.com.br, amazon.nl, amazon.co.jp, amazon.fr, if you would like your local version of Amazon adding please contact my creator.
I put it down to a really poor interpretation of polling data. I've literally just been reading about this "tough on crime" question in this book. It basically says when asked what the biggest problems the country faces as an open question very few people answer crime, but when its suggested it polls very high. What Labour have failed to grasp is that people that have smoked weed or do smoke weed feel very strongly about this to a point that it could very easily sway their vote towards Lib Dems, even if these people are a smaller proportion than those who generally oppose it, not many people would decide their election on crime generally.
The Russia Probe: What Did Trump Know and When did He Know It?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07L46G65X
FREE on February 20th
> The one question that has been upper most in the minds of millions of Americans in the aftermath of Russia’s proven meddling in America’s 2016 presidential election is: What did Trump know, and when did he know it? In a penetrating hard-hitting, wide ranging look at the events surrounding the scandal, The Russia Probe: What Did Trump Know and When did He Know It?, noted political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson asks and seeks to answer that compelling question.
>In the process he examines and debunks the major lies and myths that Trump, Trump administration officials, Trump family members, GOP investigators, and Trump apologists have put forth to the media and the public to make the issue go away.
---
FOR WOMEN ONLY: 300 Funny Jokes about Men
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07L7H194R
FREE until February 24th
> These affectionate, honest jokes will have you laughing out loud- and calling your girlfriends to share the fun! New for 2019, this book will make a great present for friends having a tough time with their men- and aren't we all!? It's full of knee-slappers, head shakers, and groan makers mostly written and chosen by women like yourself.
>This book contains no swear words, so you won't have to hide it from your kids. And its many one-liners are easy to remember, easy to tell at parties, easy to use to spice up your conversations.
Does he like to read? Maybe you could get in a subtly political informational book. Maybe his lack of interest roots from lack of knowledge about the matter.
Or you could go right for the kill
I highly recommend reading Halderman's (one of the computer scientists) book if you are interested in electoral history in the US: Broken Ballots: Will Your Vote Count?
https://www.amazon.com/Broken-Ballots-Center-Language-Information/dp/1575866366
I recommend this for everyone
http://www.goldtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39594
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812926323?ie=UTF8&tag=wwwviolentkicom&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=0812926323
http://www.amazon.com/Bernie-Sanders-Running-President-Smerdloff/dp/1515279030
There's a lot of coloring books for every candidate.
CODE RED: Computerized Election Theft and The New American Century
www.CODERED2014.com
http://www.amazon.com/CODE-RED-Computerized-Election-American/dp/1500319856
Don't read any of these unless you prefer reads like /r/Politics. I'm going to take an educated guess and recommend a textbook would be the most a-political (at least I hope).
Not a book per-se, nor neutral, but I have got to read this..
[here] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Politics-Dummies-Ann-DeLaney/dp/0764508873) read this so you can understand what you are saying next time.
Get yourself a copy of this
It's easily the best book on the subject which doesn't rely on retarded internet conspiracies.
for you
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0764508873/ref=rdr_ext_tmb
Try reading a book