Disenfranchised Hippies
A few updates on Factor items. I already blogged on Ward Churchill, so you know what I think about that. He waved his speaking fee at Hamilton College. Better than nothing. And Villanova College has removed the plaque commemorating Mine Ener. Good thinking.
The thing I really felt like commenting on is Sam Smith, Progressive Review editor. He wrote a book about reforming government and one example he gave for what's in the book was that he wants an election system where you vote for multiple candidates, like you could vote "Bush 1, Kerry 2, Nader 3, etc..." So if there's no clear winner, you go to the third party voters and look at their second choice. Maybe you'll see this the way I'm seeing it, but it seems to me that this guy wants the Independent, Green and Libertarian vote-wasters to get to vote twice. Basically, he's thinking that all the Nader voters in Florida in 2000 who would have voted for Gore should have had their votes count for Gore. Yeah, but does he think Perot's votes should have counted for Bush Sr. in 1992? I'm just asking, because double-standards are bayd. You shouldn't have a double-standard, m'kay?
I'm all for an a third party. A fourth and fifth party. How about 111 choices, like in Iraq? Of course, if we have three or more official parties, we'll always be electing people by pluralities. Say we have a republican, a democrat, and a libertarian candidate, and an election goes 34%, 36% and 30%, respectively. The democrat wins, but 64% of the electorate voted against that candidate.
I just had a brainstorm as I was typing (yes, it hurt). We could have a national primary where we decide the two parties that are going to get to run in the final election. Then, after 41 weeks of campaigning between the candidates of those two parties, we go out to vote between those two parties. I'm sure it wouldn't work. Or maybe it could work, but I doubt it would change.
Now something that might be of interest to the Clinton followers, who thought his impeachment was a witch hunt. This Smith guy was investigating the corruption in the Clinton administration before the so-called right-wing conspiracy. Good for him.
The thing I really felt like commenting on is Sam Smith, Progressive Review editor. He wrote a book about reforming government and one example he gave for what's in the book was that he wants an election system where you vote for multiple candidates, like you could vote "Bush 1, Kerry 2, Nader 3, etc..." So if there's no clear winner, you go to the third party voters and look at their second choice. Maybe you'll see this the way I'm seeing it, but it seems to me that this guy wants the Independent, Green and Libertarian vote-wasters to get to vote twice. Basically, he's thinking that all the Nader voters in Florida in 2000 who would have voted for Gore should have had their votes count for Gore. Yeah, but does he think Perot's votes should have counted for Bush Sr. in 1992? I'm just asking, because double-standards are bayd. You shouldn't have a double-standard, m'kay?
I'm all for an a third party. A fourth and fifth party. How about 111 choices, like in Iraq? Of course, if we have three or more official parties, we'll always be electing people by pluralities. Say we have a republican, a democrat, and a libertarian candidate, and an election goes 34%, 36% and 30%, respectively. The democrat wins, but 64% of the electorate voted against that candidate.
I just had a brainstorm as I was typing (yes, it hurt). We could have a national primary where we decide the two parties that are going to get to run in the final election. Then, after 41 weeks of campaigning between the candidates of those two parties, we go out to vote between those two parties. I'm sure it wouldn't work. Or maybe it could work, but I doubt it would change.
Now something that might be of interest to the Clinton followers, who thought his impeachment was a witch hunt. This Smith guy was investigating the corruption in the Clinton administration before the so-called right-wing conspiracy. Good for him.
posted by square at 7:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home