If you've been following politics lately, you know there's four candidates yet for the Republican Party nomination for President of the United States: Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum.
My good buddy David 2, in his BRUTALLY HONEST commentary for this week, breaks down the GOP's Final Four and asks the musical question: Are you ready to vote third-party yet?: http://brutallyhonestcolumn.blogspot.com/2012/02/week-of-02062012.html
As always, your thoughts and opinions are welcome, either here or on David's page. Comments left here will be forwarded to David.
Thanks for reading, and don't forget to tune in at 8 ET/5 PT TONIGHT on ShockNet Radio for the audio version of BRUTALLY HONEST: http://www.shocknetradio.com/
You can tune in at the ShockNet link or on the FREE Apple iTunes player under Radio and Classic Rock, plus you can also interact with the show by way of the LIVE chat room. Just click on Chat on the ShockNet link, type in any screen name you wish, click on Connect and you're in!
Hope to see you tonight!
Oh -- I am not able to tune in tonight. I guess I will have to listen to the podcast. I'll try for next time though.
Are you ready to vote third-party yet?
The "plurality" system with which we vote for candidates in the U.S. and many other countries (one vote per voter, winner takes all) has many problems.
If you were trying to design the worst way to vote, you might:
- Force voters to say the least possible amount – name just one candidate, and say nothing about how much you like or dislike any of the others.
- Make it reward voters for not voting for whom they really want. [....]
(from rangevoting.org; but the alternative they suggest seems to be seriously vulnerable to strategic voting.)
A good alternative to the status quo, which would encourage third-party participation with real hope of winning offices, would be Instant Runoff Voting.
Three is a crowd in a plurality voting system. It allows someone to win even when the last choice of a majority of voters. By discouraging new candidates, plurality voting suppress new ideas and dissenting opinion. It encourage campaigns built around negative attacks.
In contrast, instant runoff voting (IRV) upholds the goals of majority rule and voter choice. IRV alleviate concerns about the dreaded “spoiler effect” and encourages winning candidates to reach out to more people. Unlike traditional runoff elections, it accomplishes these goals in a single election.
With IRV voters get one vote and one ballot, but get to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate wins with a first-choice majority, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated and their supporters' second choices are distributed to the remaining candidates in an “instant runoff." The process of elimination and redistribution continues until one candidate has a majority. That's all there is to it!
(from the election reform group fairvote.org)
In the "instant runoff", first choices that hadn't been eliminated continue to be counted. There's no opportunity to strategically change one's choices between one round of counting and the next -- as opposed to current opportunities to vote for the "least electable" of hated candidates in a primary, so as to try to give your real favored candidate a better chance in the general election.
Good article running down GOP candidates. I admit no one appears to be the GOP darling, but an interesting question is,
"Could *anyone* be the GOP darling?"
The GOP is fractured, to be sure. Evangelicals with their religious agenda. Anti-government folks. Reduce debt folks. Pro-capitalism folks. I'm sure there's more.
The point is, the GOP media saga has been - 'look how no one is highly compelling!'
But maybe the GOP is so fractured that such a candidate is could hardly exist. I mean, can anyone create a candidate from whole cloth that would make the vast majority of the right happy?
Doesn't matter. A third party will be bought and paid for, just like the two we already have. Not until our campaign finance/election laws are rewritten to put the power back in the citizens instead of the corporate/special interests.
Looks like we've gone from the "Republican Clown Car" to the "4 Horsemen of the Repubocalypse": Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Does that make this "Republigeddon"?
what 4 sides? they all deny evolution and like their women zombie flavored?