quote:
I'd say three votes in order of preferred to least preferred. That way you can have your way to vote third party and if they are mathematically eliminated your vote goes to the one you find less objectionable. Currently third parties are nonviable as it splits the vote of the most similar candidate and actually HURTS the side you find least objectionable. First to a majority system is arbitrary and not in any way fair or equitable. It just produces a two-party disaster.

That would be an exciting election to follow. I bet the Dems in the big cities would love it.

It might take weeks to declare a winner, but they'd find a way to do it.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by MagicCityBlazer

Member since Nov 2010

3686 posts

Posted on 2/24/14 at 12:06 pm to doubleb

quote:
That would be an exciting election to follow. I bet the Dems in the big cities would love it.

I'm proposing one vote per candidate. It would enable people bypassing the corrupt party leaders for both D and R voters and would ensure that voting against that parties leadership with similar parties wouldn't be stiffled.

I'm not talking about a point system where each vote is a 'point' and you can allocate them as you please.
It would be vote for your preferred candidate, and the next two least objectionable.

The preferred votes are counted and the one with the least votes is eliminated, those votes go to their next favored candidate. So on and so on, until you get a single winner.

Dems actually would be devastated by this because a lot of D voters aren't as liberal as the D party has gone on some topics.

This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 12:07 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board