5 ms·
Doesn't say anything there about defending internet freedom or net neutrality. Not that Romney would have, but it can never be pointed out enough that we're no
by padobson 14y ago
Doesn't say anything there about defending internet freedom or net neutrality.
Not that Romney would have, but it can never be pointed out enough that we're not given real choices with these elections. Given that 98.5% of the electorate voted for one of the two bozos, it's clearly not being said enough.
- gte910h 14y agoAmerica has HUGE minority rule issues. I predict 2016 will have a major non R vs D theme of "Swing state vs everyone else". Reforming states to something that doesn't cause third parties to be spoilers (by using a voting system such as IRV), probably in the NE to start, is likely the new wave that gets us out of this mess.
- moultano 14y agoPlease not IRV. If we're going to change voting systems, Approval Voting is better in every conceivable way. (It's simpler, closer to what we do now, produces the condorcet winner more reliably, and doesn't have the crazy non-monotonicities that IRV does.)
- gte910h 14y agoTechnically, yes. Approval is better. Politically, IRV has a better chance of not getting huge opposition by the major parties
- Evbn 14y agoWhy would 2016 be different from any other year in that respect?
- gte910h 14y agoIMO the republican party has a lot of energy thrashing it about right now, and could be an agent for change if they think it will give them an advantage. ESPECIALLY if it starts to fracture, I could see the pieces start to try to salvage the coalition out of it, a coalition which would require the survival of third and fourth parties.