Not sure if I'm enthusiastic about any of the possible 3rd party options so far, but we do desperately need to break the two party stranglehold on our system. Remember kids, two choices is only one more than you would get in a literal dictatorship.
Not sure if I'm enthusiastic about any of the possible 3rd party options so far, but we do desperately need to break the two party stranglehold on our system. Remember kids, two choices is only one more than you would get in a literal dictatorship.
I'm rarely excited about any candidate for any political office. Agree the two party stranglehold needs to go (And they can take daylight savings time with them).
My ideal is a type of rank voting. Whether or not it would work in practice is another thing altogether, but the idea seems better than what we currently have.
Ranked voting is an interesting idea. Whether it "works" in practice is in the eye of the beholder. If you are happier with the outcome than you would have been with only voting for one candidate, then you like ranked voting. Otherwise, you don't. This happened some years ago in Oakland CA, where the mayor was elected despite at least one other candidates having more 1st place votes. Not sure it would work, even if constitutional, for presidential elections, especially since we have the electoral college and not just a most votes wins system.
Not sure if I'm enthusiastic about any of the possible 3rd party options so far, but we do desperately need to break the two party stranglehold on our system. Remember kids, two choices is only one more than you would get in a literal dictatorship.
I'm rarely excited about any candidate for any political office. Agree the two party stranglehold needs to go (And they can take daylight savings time with them).
My ideal is a type of rank voting. Whether or not it would work in practice is another thing altogether, but the idea seems better than what we currently have.
Ranked voting is an interesting idea. Whether it "works" in practice is in the eye of the beholder. If you are happier with the outcome than you would have been with only voting for one candidate, then you like ranked voting. Otherwise, you don't. This happened some years ago in Oakland CA, where the mayor was elected despite at least one other candidates having more 1st place votes. Not sure it would work, even if constitutional, for presidential elections, especially since we have the electoral college and not just a most votes wins system.