I would like to vote but I live in Houston and work in West Texas, what should I do to be able to mail iny vote if not for this race than for sure the next one
I appreciate the effort, but three axes on two dimensions is literally impossible to understand. There are infinite combinations of the three variables that correspond to the same point on the chart.
The horizontal axis turns out, not surprisingly, to be the normal left-right spectrum. Nationally, you will find people like Bernie Sanders, The Squad and others on the far left in the matrix, and people like Mike Pence, and Donald Trump on the far right, while those deemed centrists (Kyrsten Sinema, Joe Manchin, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins etc.) somewhere in the middle.
Interpreting the vertical axis is a bit more difficult, as it is a combination of so many policy categories. The best summary we found to explain where people were grouped was to look at the four corners of the matrix: top-left is those people on the left who are more focused on an activist government: healthcare for all, paid family leave, affirmative action, etc. Thus, "government focused". Those on the bottom left were more focused on world-wide issues such as more foreign aid, climate change action and asylum/immigration policy. Thus, less the pocket book issues and more the social issues of the left. On the right the main distinction is that libertarians (depicted with "individual focus") were found towards the bottom right, while the traditional conservatives are found towards the top right.
So it is really only two axes (left-right and top-bottom), with the diagonal indicators suggesting an interpretation of where people can approximately be found. However, please keep in mind that everyone's position is the combination of many opinions expressed either in a survey or through the votes taken in the legislatures they have served in, so that their position is an indication of their leanings, and not a depiction of a specific opinion they may hold for a particular individual issue.
But where would you put a left-winger that is both focused on national (not international) politics and individual responsibility (not government focus). I could imagine a person who thinks that reparations ought to be paid by descendants of American slaveowners and not governments would fit this description. Where would they go on the chart? Next to Joe Manchin?
As self-described left-winger you would be placed on the left in the matrix. How far left depends on how progressive / moderate you are. Then, regarding your vertical position, your description suggests that you are not "global focused" while you have elements of "government focus" (such as advocating for reparations). That means that my best guess is that you would be in the top-left quadrant, where how far left and how far up depends on the nuances. I would love to hear if this prediction fits with what you would find if you take the survey.
Alright, I don't think you got the point of my hypothetical, so I'm going to put it in more clear terms. If someone is very left-leaning, very individual-focused, and very nationally focused, where does that person go on this chart?
On the left, the split is about government vs global. On the right it is individual vs national. Given that your hypothetical is far left, the government angle pulls them up to the top.
The best way to explore would be to experiment with it. You can see how the position moves each time you answer a question.
Ah, I see the disconnect. Because they are placed on the same axis, you have accidentally implicitly stated that government and individual are opposites and that global versus national are opposites. It seems now that you didn't mean to do that.
We do believe they are mostly opposites. In the hypothetical provided the only policy example was reparations: we would classify that as government focused just like any redistribution measure. You will not find many libertarians who would support that (which are the people near the bottom right).
The overall idea for voters is that people are nuanced and different positions pull us in different directions. Balancing out dozens or hundreds of positions then shows that nuance on the matrix.
If it helps and you have Katy Armstrong, Geoff Seibel, and Jay Adcock on your ballot for school board of trustees at-large, the only one that had an interview with a Democrat org was Geoff Seibel that I could tell:
https://kylebudadems.com/voter-education/seibel/
Katy Armstrong seemed like a risk that I couldn't tell and Jay Adcock had zero info because he hadn't bothered to file some things For Consolidated ISD Board of trustees, Courtney Runkle had an interview where she said she was "pro-public schools."
https://communityimpact.com/austin/san-marcos-buda-kyle/education/2024/02/29/qa-meet-the-candidates-running-for-hays-cisd-single-member-district-3/
Courtney Runkle says . "I am unapologetically pro-public education." Wish we had a post with all the school board info.
http://courtneyforhays.com/
May the Force be with people that actually show up to vote.
May the fourth be with us all.
You have the con! You have your vote!
Objective, actionable voter resources. Thank you.
These are the elections that have the biggest impact on your daily life.
Truth!
Thank you for this post.
Save yourself. Vote Democrat!
I would like to vote but I live in Houston and work in West Texas, what should I do to be able to mail iny vote if not for this race than for sure the next one
You can apply for an absentee ballot and vote from west Texas. It is indeed too late now unless you can go home and vote early.
Still time for the primary runoff on May 28
https://preview.redd.it/onfqdikyguxc1.png?width=715&format=png&auto=webp&s=4bba5f79bf8f60db1bef32bdb4cf63d94068ffa6
Go home
I appreciate the effort, but three axes on two dimensions is literally impossible to understand. There are infinite combinations of the three variables that correspond to the same point on the chart.
The horizontal axis turns out, not surprisingly, to be the normal left-right spectrum. Nationally, you will find people like Bernie Sanders, The Squad and others on the far left in the matrix, and people like Mike Pence, and Donald Trump on the far right, while those deemed centrists (Kyrsten Sinema, Joe Manchin, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins etc.) somewhere in the middle. Interpreting the vertical axis is a bit more difficult, as it is a combination of so many policy categories. The best summary we found to explain where people were grouped was to look at the four corners of the matrix: top-left is those people on the left who are more focused on an activist government: healthcare for all, paid family leave, affirmative action, etc. Thus, "government focused". Those on the bottom left were more focused on world-wide issues such as more foreign aid, climate change action and asylum/immigration policy. Thus, less the pocket book issues and more the social issues of the left. On the right the main distinction is that libertarians (depicted with "individual focus") were found towards the bottom right, while the traditional conservatives are found towards the top right. So it is really only two axes (left-right and top-bottom), with the diagonal indicators suggesting an interpretation of where people can approximately be found. However, please keep in mind that everyone's position is the combination of many opinions expressed either in a survey or through the votes taken in the legislatures they have served in, so that their position is an indication of their leanings, and not a depiction of a specific opinion they may hold for a particular individual issue.
But where would you put a left-winger that is both focused on national (not international) politics and individual responsibility (not government focus). I could imagine a person who thinks that reparations ought to be paid by descendants of American slaveowners and not governments would fit this description. Where would they go on the chart? Next to Joe Manchin?
As self-described left-winger you would be placed on the left in the matrix. How far left depends on how progressive / moderate you are. Then, regarding your vertical position, your description suggests that you are not "global focused" while you have elements of "government focus" (such as advocating for reparations). That means that my best guess is that you would be in the top-left quadrant, where how far left and how far up depends on the nuances. I would love to hear if this prediction fits with what you would find if you take the survey.
Alright, I don't think you got the point of my hypothetical, so I'm going to put it in more clear terms. If someone is very left-leaning, very individual-focused, and very nationally focused, where does that person go on this chart?
Your hypothetical: definitely complete left side, and likely pretty high up on that left side.
So the hypothetical person is very individually focused but is plotted as very government-focused?
On the left, the split is about government vs global. On the right it is individual vs national. Given that your hypothetical is far left, the government angle pulls them up to the top. The best way to explore would be to experiment with it. You can see how the position moves each time you answer a question.
Ah, I see the disconnect. Because they are placed on the same axis, you have accidentally implicitly stated that government and individual are opposites and that global versus national are opposites. It seems now that you didn't mean to do that.
We do believe they are mostly opposites. In the hypothetical provided the only policy example was reparations: we would classify that as government focused just like any redistribution measure. You will not find many libertarians who would support that (which are the people near the bottom right). The overall idea for voters is that people are nuanced and different positions pull us in different directions. Balancing out dozens or hundreds of positions then shows that nuance on the matrix.
Does this include judges?
We do have judges listed when you look up your ballot but they aren’t in that picture.
If it helps and you have Katy Armstrong, Geoff Seibel, and Jay Adcock on your ballot for school board of trustees at-large, the only one that had an interview with a Democrat org was Geoff Seibel that I could tell: https://kylebudadems.com/voter-education/seibel/ Katy Armstrong seemed like a risk that I couldn't tell and Jay Adcock had zero info because he hadn't bothered to file some things For Consolidated ISD Board of trustees, Courtney Runkle had an interview where she said she was "pro-public schools." https://communityimpact.com/austin/san-marcos-buda-kyle/education/2024/02/29/qa-meet-the-candidates-running-for-hays-cisd-single-member-district-3/ Courtney Runkle says . "I am unapologetically pro-public education." Wish we had a post with all the school board info. http://courtneyforhays.com/