Preferential Voting in Presidential Elections

[Caesar]

Yay or nay?

I would have thought it would be an out-and-out positive. In the long run it would help break the two-party stranglehold, and increase the relevance of minor candidates (such as Nader) who would be able to direct their preferences to the major candidates of their choice.

Likewise, voters could have the flexibility of voting for the actual candidate of their choice (rather than the 'lesser of two evils'), yet still be assured that their vote would count by the way they preference the major parties. The perfect example of this is 2000, where analysts believed up to 80% of Nader's voters in Florida would have preferenced Gore over Bush if the option was available. Needless to say it wasn't, and the votes were effectively rendered useless.

However, there must be some objections, because the system hasn't yet been introduced. Please enlighten me.

[Foosinho]

http://www.fairvote.org/articles/openprocess.htm
http://www.fairvote.org/irv/faq.htm

I think the system hasn't been introduced because it weakens the stranglehold on power the two parties currently have. I honestly can not come up with a a single reason not to use IRV, other than the time to count votes - which in theory shouldn't be a problem since (most of the time) we don't count votes by hand anyway.

Believe it or not, this is the one issue that makes me want to run for office at some level, just so I can try to influence the process to implement IRV at at least a local or state level.

[IntheNet]

Although I support the GOP and Republicans, I don't like the way Third Party candidates are handled in elections... Nader is getting screwed in this campaign and it is a real shame...he doesn't even get his name on the ballot because the Democrats contest every one of his state signature lists, and he can't participate in Debates!

A legitimate vote is for only one person and voters should have every option available...suppression of the Third Party by the Democrats is just awful!

IntheNet

[Caesar]

Although I support the GOP and Republicans, I don't like the way Third Party candidates are handled in elections... Nader is getting screwed in this campaign and it is a real shame...he doesn't even get his name on the ballot because the Democrats contest every one of his state signature lists, and he can't participate in Debates!

A legitimate vote is for only one person and voters should have every option available...suppression of the Third Party by the Democrats is just awful!

IntheNet
Soooooo... where do you stand on preferential voting?

[Claymore]

Although I support the GOP and Republicans, I don't like the way Third Party candidates are handled in elections... Nader is getting screwed in this campaign and it is a real shame...he doesn't even get his name on the ballot because the Democrats contest every one of his state signature lists, and he can't participate in Debates!

A legitimate vote is for only one person and voters should have every option available...suppression of the Third Party by the Democrats is just awful!

IntheNet

Oh please. If Nader were a right-wing conservative, the GOP would be doing a lot worse than fighting his inclusion on the ballot.

As it is, Nader represents no one but himself.

[bright]

Here is a good site that explains all the various methods of elections: http://www.aceproject.org/main/english/es/index.htm

IRV is referred to as "Alternative Vote" on that site, under the heading for "Majority-Plurality Systems". There are explanations of the advantages and the disadvantages. Keep in mind that the US uses single-member districts in every level of government, so the disadvantages described on that site are pretty much moot.

Here in Washington state, we are trying to get an initiative passed that will go to the state legislature or to the ballot next year: http://www.irvwa.org/ I encourage people in other states with an initiative process to try to start something similar.

- Paul

[christopher d]

Here is a good site that explains all the various methods of elections: http://www.aceproject.org/main/english/es/index.htm

IRV is referred to as "Alternative Vote" on that site, under the heading for "Majority-Plurality Systems". There are explanations of the advantages and the disadvantages. Keep in mind that the US uses single-member districts in every level of government, so the disadvantages described on that site are pretty much moot.

Here in Washington state, we are trying to get an initiative passed that will go to the state legislature or to the ballot next year: http://www.irvwa.org/ I encourage people in other states with an initiative process to try to start something similar.

- PaulSomewhere on the Fairvote.org site you'll see some of the shenanigans pulled by the CA Sec. of State to block/delay implementation of IRV after the folks in San Francisco made it the law of the land there. It's a huge issue in my (admittedly biased) opinion, and would be a real stepping-stone towards an even "more perfect union".