4 ms·

> Mostly I'm really bummed Johnson only got 1% this time around. Third party candidates don't stand a chance in a FPTP system, because a vote for Johnson is, i

> Mostly I'm really bummed Johnson only got 1% this time around. Third party candidates don't stand a chance in a FPTP system, because a vote for Johnson is, in practical terms, a vote against Romney (in swing states, that is; the idiocy of the electoral college ensures that it really doesn't matter in states like MO). You either need to have a proportional voting system for Congress so that third parties can gain a foothold in the public conscious, or you need IRV, à la Australia, so people don't feel like their vote's being wasted.

jessaustin 14y ago
"don't stand a chance" I didn't actually expect Johnson to win. The majority of voters don't support peace and freedom at this time, so I didn't expect them to vote for those things this time. However, I had hoped that a better showing by Johnson would prompt more voters to at least consider the possibility of peace and freedom, and that that consideration could inform their votes next time. "the idiocy of the electoral college" One might think the case for this proposition is obvious, but it's not. The electoral college effectively prevents having a recount in every state and every precinct any time the popular vote is close. Only when the electoral count is close and the popular vote of some state is also close will we have a recount, with all of its inherent confusion and lawsuits. I'm glad we have an institution that prevents recounts in most elections. What other institution would you propose, or do you see no problem with recounts?