[Vision2020] Alternate voting systems (was Re: Narcissist Nader May Run Attention)

[Paul Rumelhart]

Anything along those lines is better than what we have, but I prefer the 
"instant" runoff election type.  We would have our election as normal, 
except that you choose your candidates in order of preference.  If you 
want McCain, but could live with Obama but not Hilary, then you would 
vote for McCain as the first candidate, and Obama as your second choice 
and then stop there. 

When they tally the votes, the first candidate to have a majority wins.  
If it's, say, McCain at 25%, Obama at 35%, and Clinton at 40%, you would 
throw out McCain's votes as the candidate with the smallest number of 
votes, and redistribute the secondary votes for everyone who voted for 
McCain.  So in this case your vote for Obama would be counted.  This 
continues until some candidate reaches 50%.  That way, you have a much 
bigger voice over what happens, and third party candidates can actually 
have some sway in the election since you're not "throwing your vote 
away".  Eventually, we could actually break out of the two-party choke 
hold that is currently in place.

Unfortunately, almost everyone involved in politics is heavily vested in 
the two-party system as it currently stands, so I don't know how we 
could actually make this come to pass.  Perhaps we could start at the 
lowest level?  Just as a thought experiment, does anyone know how we 
would go about passing the necessary changes in law or procedure or 
whatever to change the City elections in Moscow over to this kind of system?

Paul

Tom Hansen wrote:
> I fully agree.
>
> There is room for a third party under the "runoff" election system.
>
> Have a "preliminary" election at some point during the January-April time-
> frame, followed up with a runoff election in November between the two top 
> candidates from the preliminary election.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
>   
>> Chasuk wrote:
>>     
>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:24 PM, Paul Rumelhart 
>>>       
> <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Well, narcissist or not, I can get behind the promise to fight
>>>>  "corporate greed, corporate power, and corporate control".  It beats 
>>>>         
> the
>   
>>>>  current administration whose promise was apparently to 
>>>>         
> fight "individual
>   
>>>>  liberty, common sense, and that damn piece of paper called the
>>>>  Constitution".
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> The sentiment is wonderful, but the promise is empty, as Nader has no
>>> chance of securing the presidency.  All he might accomplish would be a
>>> division of the electorate, which would benefit no one except for
>>> McCain.  Let's just say that I don't want to be exposed to the horror
>>> show that would be McCain.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>  From a strategic perspective, you are probably right.  Until we move to 
>> instant-runoff voting, two-round voting, run-off voting, or something 
>> similar, we'll be stuck with a two-party system and choices like this 
>>     
> one.
>   
>> Paul
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>>     
>
>
> "People who ridicule others while hiding behind anonymous monikers in chat-
> room forums are neither brave nor clever." 
>
> - Latah County Sheriff Wayne Rausch (August 21,
> 2007)
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
>            http://www.fsr.com/
>
>
>
>