"when both political parties are working for special interests..."
1. This situation is caused by the enduring Duopoly (Democratic and Republican Parties).
2. The fundamental mechanism maintaining the Duopoly is the "spoiler effect". The voter who wishes to vote for someone outside the Duopoly is faced with this choice: Do I vote for the c…
"when both political parties are working for special interests..."
1. This situation is caused by the enduring Duopoly (Democratic and Republican Parties).
2. The fundamental mechanism maintaining the Duopoly is the "spoiler effect". The voter who wishes to vote for someone outside the Duopoly is faced with this choice: Do I vote for the candidate I truly prefer, knowing this:
a. Third party or independent candidates DON'T WIN. (The only exception in Presidential elections was in 1860, when third party candidate Abraham Lincoln was able to win because the Democratic party had split in two over slavery. Lincoln defeated each of those separately but would have lost to a unified Democratic Party. The Republican Party then replaced the Whigs as one of the Duopoly parties.)
b. Voting for the third party or independent candidate draws votes away from the Duopoly candidate most like him or her. This is the toxic spoiler effect, and the stronger the non-Duopoly challenger is, the more toxic is his effect on the election. (There are wealthy people or organizations who will surreptitiously give financial support to such candidates, not because they want them to win, but to cause more votes to be taken from the Duopoly candidate most like them. This is deliberate weaponizing of the spoiler effect.)
c.) Consequently, the voter's rational choice is to grin and bear choosing the "lesser of two evils" so that his vote can make a difference, and so that he can avoid contributing to the toxic spoiler event.
d.) The operation of this rational choice is why the third party or independent candidate always loses, and the Duopoly is once again maintained.
3. The reason the voter is forced to make this choice is because we have a dysfunctional voting system that limits him to only one choice and allows a candidate to win with a mere plurality, not necessarily an absolute majority. The Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) system allows the voter to express his second, third, etc. choice. If there is no immediate clear majority-winner RCV facilitates an instant runoff, dropping the candidate with least votes from all ballots. On ballots where that “low man” candidate was first choice, the second choice is elevated to the first position, and the recount is made. The process is repeated if necessary until someone gathers a majority. This person is the winner. With RCV the voter has no reason not to make the candidate he truly prefers his first choice. If it was not a member of the Duopoly, he makes the “lesser of two evils” from the Duopoly his second choice, guaranteeing that he has not “wasted his vote” if his first-choice candidate is eliminated. THIS DESTROYS THE SPOILER EFFECT and the structural maintenance mechanism of the Duopoly disappears.
4. RCV would have at least two major effects:
a.) As mentioned, the maintenance mechanism of the Duopoly disappears and over time more and more third parties and independents will be elected. They will provide alternatives to any party captured by special interests.
b.) Winning an absolute majority when running against multiple opponents will require the candidate to be concerned about winning second choice, third choice, etc. votes to gather a winning majority through the run-off votes. This will require being moderate and conciliatory: FIREBRANDS LOSE!
5.) The current process of converting from the defective single-choice, plurality system to RCV is being done (slowly) at the state level—one state at a time. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to mandate RCV for all federal elections, which would immediately sweep away all the political dysfunction caused by the single choice, plurality voting system. (In order not to lose members in Congress it will be in the interest of the state parties to convert primary elections to RCV as well.)
6. The current Republican Party will have no part of this. We will need to wait until the Democratic Party has at least temporary control of the federal government. The Democrats will also be reluctant because of their Duopoly status, and because the spoiler effect gives incumbents an electoral advantage in elections. So it will be necessary for grass-root groups to organize to compel the Democrats to pass legislation mandating RCV. When the possibility of creating this legislation arises, nothing should be of higher priority than organizing and supporting the campaign to accomplish this.
"when both political parties are working for special interests..."
1. This situation is caused by the enduring Duopoly (Democratic and Republican Parties).
2. The fundamental mechanism maintaining the Duopoly is the "spoiler effect". The voter who wishes to vote for someone outside the Duopoly is faced with this choice: Do I vote for the candidate I truly prefer, knowing this:
a. Third party or independent candidates DON'T WIN. (The only exception in Presidential elections was in 1860, when third party candidate Abraham Lincoln was able to win because the Democratic party had split in two over slavery. Lincoln defeated each of those separately but would have lost to a unified Democratic Party. The Republican Party then replaced the Whigs as one of the Duopoly parties.)
b. Voting for the third party or independent candidate draws votes away from the Duopoly candidate most like him or her. This is the toxic spoiler effect, and the stronger the non-Duopoly challenger is, the more toxic is his effect on the election. (There are wealthy people or organizations who will surreptitiously give financial support to such candidates, not because they want them to win, but to cause more votes to be taken from the Duopoly candidate most like them. This is deliberate weaponizing of the spoiler effect.)
c.) Consequently, the voter's rational choice is to grin and bear choosing the "lesser of two evils" so that his vote can make a difference, and so that he can avoid contributing to the toxic spoiler event.
d.) The operation of this rational choice is why the third party or independent candidate always loses, and the Duopoly is once again maintained.
3. The reason the voter is forced to make this choice is because we have a dysfunctional voting system that limits him to only one choice and allows a candidate to win with a mere plurality, not necessarily an absolute majority. The Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) system allows the voter to express his second, third, etc. choice. If there is no immediate clear majority-winner RCV facilitates an instant runoff, dropping the candidate with least votes from all ballots. On ballots where that “low man” candidate was first choice, the second choice is elevated to the first position, and the recount is made. The process is repeated if necessary until someone gathers a majority. This person is the winner. With RCV the voter has no reason not to make the candidate he truly prefers his first choice. If it was not a member of the Duopoly, he makes the “lesser of two evils” from the Duopoly his second choice, guaranteeing that he has not “wasted his vote” if his first-choice candidate is eliminated. THIS DESTROYS THE SPOILER EFFECT and the structural maintenance mechanism of the Duopoly disappears.
4. RCV would have at least two major effects:
a.) As mentioned, the maintenance mechanism of the Duopoly disappears and over time more and more third parties and independents will be elected. They will provide alternatives to any party captured by special interests.
b.) Winning an absolute majority when running against multiple opponents will require the candidate to be concerned about winning second choice, third choice, etc. votes to gather a winning majority through the run-off votes. This will require being moderate and conciliatory: FIREBRANDS LOSE!
5.) The current process of converting from the defective single-choice, plurality system to RCV is being done (slowly) at the state level—one state at a time. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to mandate RCV for all federal elections, which would immediately sweep away all the political dysfunction caused by the single choice, plurality voting system. (In order not to lose members in Congress it will be in the interest of the state parties to convert primary elections to RCV as well.)
6. The current Republican Party will have no part of this. We will need to wait until the Democratic Party has at least temporary control of the federal government. The Democrats will also be reluctant because of their Duopoly status, and because the spoiler effect gives incumbents an electoral advantage in elections. So it will be necessary for grass-root groups to organize to compel the Democrats to pass legislation mandating RCV. When the possibility of creating this legislation arises, nothing should be of higher priority than organizing and supporting the campaign to accomplish this.