Posted By: rastroMy immediate reaction to the system in Australia is that it would put more wackos in office than already are. if people can have a second choice, there's no reason to not vote for a nutjob that would otherwise be unelectable. The issue of electability goes out the window. So someone like Steve Lonnigan (not that I think he's a wacko) could get elected because people who didn't think he could beat Corzine could still vote for him and put Christie as their second choice.In the scenario you describe, Rastro, Christie (as the second choice of most) would most likely be the winner, not Lonegan (who I think IS a wacko, but that's a different topic).
Posted By: bobkRastro, I think part of the argument for instant runoff voting is to eliminate the electoral college, and under that scenario GHWB almost certainly would have won the election. I ain't anal enough to go through the election results state by state to see what possibly could have happened in the Electoral College scenario.
Posted By: ffofand so with the republicans...get ready for that loooong nap
Posted By: ajcIn a way it's too bad Gore didn't get elected...
One thing for sure, Obama or any Democrat wouldn't have been elected again for the next forty years!
Posted By: LOSTPosted By: ajcIn a way it's too bad Gore didn't get elected...
One thing for sure, Obama or any Democrat wouldn't have been elected again for the next forty years!
You really live in a world of your own, don't you?
Posted By: GL2OK, here we go with the MOL dynamic. Do libs spend time convincing ajc that the sky is blue while cons allow him to represent the "conservative" POV?
Posted By: drummerboyPosted By: GL2OK, here we go with the MOL dynamic. Do libs spend time convincing ajc that the sky is blue while cons allow him to represent the "conservative" POV?
is it really possible that among all the MOL'ers out there, reading this right now, that there isn't someone who can rationally represent the con point of view?
I guess it's not really possible - how can you rationally represent something that's basically irrational?
Posted By: GL2The march to glory continues...
November 29, 2009
South Carolina Rift Highlights Debate Over G.O.P.
By SHAILA DEWAN
CHARLESTON, S.C. When Senator Lindsey Graham joined forces last month with Senator John Kerry on a compromise to the climate change legislation known as cap and trade, it was the last straw for the Charleston County Republican Party.
...
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
That aside, I have to confess that the phrase "Louisiana Purchase" is perfect, and funny.
The Republican party would probably be much better off if we had an automatic runoff system like Australia, and then they could have a bunch of splinter parties in which most members would still rank the mainstream Republican candidate (a Mitt Romney) as their second choice. Here's how it works: your vote is reassigned by the computer to your second choice if your first choice candidate does not place in the top two. It ends the third-party spoiler problem. But will Republicans be smart enough to favor such electoral amendments?
Opening up something like this might open up the issue of direct election of President, getting rid of the electoral college and saying that the extra weight small population states have in the Senate (esp. under cloture!) is more than enough protection for them. Could we get three-quarters of states to ratify this? Maybe if the amendment were bundled with other things that small states want. Like, for example, some system to rotate first primaries among blocks of states on (say) a 5 presidential election cycle [imagine, five primary dates, 10 states per day, with these 10-state groups rotating each election, each group being first for one presidential election every 20 yrs -- how beautiful, efficient, and FAIR]. Okay, NH is not going to ratify this, but who cares if we have enough other states that benefit.
While we're at it, we might as well tackle gerrymandering, and lack of representation in Congress to DC, US protectorates, and Puerto Rico (who did us harm by refusing to become a state, though). This is much of what ails our system of elections. DO all this, and I'd predict that smaller political groups, districts gerrymandered to be safe, safe states in presidential elections, and late primary states would not feel so alienated. They would feel they were getting a fair shake at being heard at the national level in party primaries and general elections. That might actually build solidarity and fraternity -- almost totally forgotten virtues among American political opponents and alienated voters.