posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 06:34 PM
It took me a little while to understand what you meant, but now I think I do - you're saying vote for vote 1 for who you really want (e.g. Nader,
Buchanan, Spiderman, whatever, the unlikelies) who really doesn't have a chance and then vote 2 for either Rep or Dem (the "likelies" under the
current system) in the event of a run-off. Umm, right?
I think that's a very interesting idea. I'm sure it'll make for very very interesting fund-raising too! It's a start, at any rate. I don't
think it'll give us a "third party" president in the foreseeable future (wasn't the guy that had the 3rd largest number of votes, Ralph Nader, not
even on the ballot in all 50 states?!) You need what, 4% is it to get matching federal funds (what Nader fell just shy of if I recall.)
It also asks voters for a little more, voters that in the county above me (Palm Beach) can't even reliably figure out as it is
touchscreens everywhere will help immeasurably (if you've voted on one yet you know a three year old could use it - heck, I voted in Spanish on one
because the line was shorter just the other day for '06 - and I don't speak Spanish.) They should also be very helpful in eliminating
time-consuming re-counts, but there are a whole slew of concerns over them well-covered on this site.
I like the idea.