DJL 232 #1 March 2, 2016 It makes sense in a two party General Election but we're seeing the effect of someone with less than 50% of the vote winning because the other candidates are splitting the vote. It's logical that there will be several candidates with the same point of view in any given election. Aside from someone being more of a socialist or someone being basically a Nazi with a toupe each party has candidates that generally reflect the view of the candidates. Is there a push anywhere to change this? Here's and explanation of Instant Run-off voting, a very well established way to find the best candidate in a field of several similar choices. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Runoff_voting"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #2 March 2, 2016 The parties have made this system the way it is to help frontrunners consolidate early. The Republicans actually changed their rules after Romney was dragged into a prolonged primary fight. Those new rules will make it even harder to fight Trump. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #3 March 2, 2016 I shouldn't have phrased it like that. I'm not talking about winner taking all of the delegates - I'll see if I can change the subject. I'm talking about single choice voting vs. ranked choice voting."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #4 March 2, 2016 QuoteI'm talking about single choice voting vs. ranked choice voting. I agree that ranked choice is the best way to choose the candidate that is most acceptable to most people. Unfortunately consensus has become a dirty word in US politics. Also ranked choice directly conflicts with the "winner take all", "if you aren't #1 you're just a loser" mentality that pervades a lot of American politics and, unfortunately, society. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #5 March 2, 2016 GeorgiaDonQuoteI'm talking about single choice voting vs. ranked choice voting. I agree that ranked choice is the best way to choose the candidate that is most acceptable to most people. Unfortunately consensus has become a dirty word in US politics. Also ranked choice directly conflicts with the "winner take all", "if you aren't #1 you're just a loser" mentality that pervades a lot of American politics and, unfortunately, society. Don "If you ain't first, you're last" - Ricky Bobby https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4usE2RePqo It would be an incredible irony if the US voted for several new methods of voting by using a single choice voting system and ended up with the same thing we have. That's progress in America."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #6 March 3, 2016 I like the idea of ranked choice. It can be gamed of course, but the one model where you just keep dropping the lowest candidate out and divvying up his votes to the remaining candidates - repeat until someone has over half - I like it a lot. Thoughtful people can actually rank their choices, and the party line fanatics can just ranked their own guys over the others without worry of losing their vote. You get to vote for your person 1st, but still allow the others in as backups with your philosophy. It allows you to vote against someone by ranking them last..... I don't see a downside. QuoteIt would be an incredible irony if the US voted for several new methods of voting by using a single choice voting system and ended up with the same thing we have. That's progress in America. Gratuitous and useless slam on America noted and appreciated. Very special. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TriGirl 268 #7 March 3, 2016 Not to mention, with two parties essentially running the show, the state primaries and caucuses mostly disenfranchise huge portions of the population. In states where only voters registered in the party can vote in that primary (or participate in the caucus), the Independents are left waiting until the general election. I've advocated before for everyone using their write-in rights to express their true desires, but of course, that's never going to get a third candidate elected to the presidency (perhaps some races in smaller congressional districts, or state legislature districts, but still a long shot). With no other source of funding for a third-party candidate to get his or her message out, and convince enough people that they have a chance to compete so that they'd be considered. Of course, that would require a lot more voters in this country actually to pay attention to the candidates' PLANS and proposed POLICIES.... So, bottom line, is that while the system is totally broken, I don't anticipate it will be fixed anytime soon. See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus Shut Up & Jump! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #8 March 4, 2016 Quote Gratuitous and useless slam on America noted and appreciated. Very special. As if the country is beyond reproach? There are many gimmicks in place to stop progress; filibusters, vetoes, party affiliated judges, and single choice voting being several of those. Some are checks and balances, some are exploited to just stop things."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
