Ive mentioned this before, and though its not that big a subject, I thought Id mention it again as mid-term elections are just around the corner and the recent election in Virginia brought it to the fore of my mind. Personally, I think our elective system has a serious flaw. While the system allows several candidates to participate, it also allows candidates to win with far less than a majority of votes. This means that someone can be elected to a position, even though a majority of people DONT want that person in that position. As an example, take a typical election including a democrat, a republican and a third party. Mathematically, a candidate in this scenario could win their position with as little as 34% of the vote total if it was an airtight race to the end where each of the losers garnered just 33% of the total. That means while 66% of the voters chose against the winner (a clear majority), he/she would still win the position and be the representative for that area. This is where my math mind takes over and imagines a better way that would be more fair and just for all candidates of any affiliation, and perhaps break the political-party gridlock of which weve all grown tired. What if the regular vote was just the first step? What if we adjusted the system so that candidates who dont win at least 51% in the first election must run against the 2nd place finisher in a duel without 3rd parties to spoil the math? This would allow 3rd parties a chance to run in the first open election, and mandate that the eventual winner MUST take at least 51% of the total votes. A system like this would allow people to vote for their true favorite candidate in the first election, then vote again if their candidate doesnt finish #1 or #2. Weve all heard about 3rd parties muddying the water and being wasted votes, but this new system would change all that and be totally impartial. History and records show that many people want to give 3rd parties a chance, but theyre afraid voting for them is often a vote for the other side, so they simply vote for the D or the R, and this is exactly what the Ds & Rs want. What Im suggesting as a change would level the playing field. It may still end up being the Ds and Rs duking it out in the runoff duels, but at least then people would be voting cleanly for one or the other and a true majority winner would be elected. On the other hand, it would give 3rd party candidates a much better chance to compete while not offering any advantage to anyone...simply removing the built-in advantage the Ds & Rs currently enjoy.
Posted on: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 17:19:25 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015