[geeks] Fahrenheit 9/11

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

Fri, 25 Jun 2004 @ 01:52 +0000, wa2egp at att.net said:

> > The problem is IMO that the system in this country is set up as a "winner 
> > takes all" which is not very representative of such diverse society. 
> > Ideally the system should have evolved into a more "parlamentary" 
> > approach, which caters to a more representative election process. There 
> > would be a tendency to still have two major parties (left/right) but the 
> > smaller issue "centric" parties would also have a voice in the process. A 
> > society as diverse as the USA should have been far more aware of the 
> > representation issues, the one size fits all to politics is rather 
> > dangerous. The current lack of differenciation between demos and repubs is 
> > a clear warning. 
> 
> What bothers me is that "debates" usually do not have any third parties
> included because "they won't get more than 10% of the vote".  They certainly
> won't now.  That and the media attitude that it's a "two party system".  It's 
> never been a two party system.

It's not a Windows world either, but that's still the majority of
(desktop) systems out there.

It's an effectively two-party system.

What really sucks is that casting a vote for a third party is usually
the same as casting a vote for the party you oppose, since other third
parties you like will normally be drawing voters from the ranks of your
primary party.

What we need is fixes in the voting system that allow you to vote
against the two primary parties, but without the risk of effectively
voting for someone you oppose.

There are a variety of ways to accomplish this, and quite a few
cities/states/nations do it already.

Personally, I would love to just be voting for people, without worrying
with parties.

I don't want to elect a platform, I want to elect a leader.


-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- [4649 5920 4320 204e 4452 5420 5348 5920 4820
2056 2054 434d 2048 4d54 2045 204e 5259 4820 444e 0a53]