[geeks] Fahrenheit 9/11

[wa2egp at att.net]

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

Do I see a parallel between the computer world and the world of politics?

>It's an effectively two-party system.

That's my point.  Nobody else can get in without a struggle.  And from a quote from Truman "..there's not a dime worth of difference..."

>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.

That's why third party candidates are a threat.  Maybe that's why there are not as "publicized" as the Demicans or the Republicrats.

>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 was an article in a recent Scientific American about different methods of voting for a leader.  Interesting reading.  Nothing really jumps out as being a lot better than what we have.  My complaint is that third party candidates are
"effectively" (to use your term) shut out by money and the media.

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

There are problems with all of the systems unfortunately.

>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.

I think most people on this list would agree with you.  Of course, the platform can be forgotten/ignored/changed (like campaign promises) but the person is still there.