Do we really have to go with the DNC & RNC picks?

[jayem]

If that's a concern, give some thought to how a direct popular vote would work out. People never seem to do that, but if the election were at all close (as with your own example of Bush v. Gore), the recounts and court challenges would go on for the better part of a year. That's one advantage to having the Electoral College instead.

It's much less likely to be an issue if nominee are chosen in a national primary. All contenders, from all parties, and independents, run against each other a few months before the November election. By ranked choice voting, the field is narrowed to the 2 most preferred candidates nationally. Who could be from the same party, or different parties, or independents. Whatever the voters decide. These 2 are the final nominees. They chose running mates and the campaigns proceed as they do now. Theirs will be the only names on every state's Presidential ballot. (Write-ins must still be allowed, but their effect should be minimal) Then come November, the President-elect is chosen by direct popular vote. Advantages: A much more orderly nomination process. No more individual state primaries or caucuses. No more varying rules for choosing convention delegates. The parties can still have their conventions and designate a preferred nominee. But the final choice as to who runs is determined by the voters. The biggest advantage is that this weakens the parties. Presidential nominees are chosen by the electorate. Not by parties. And especially not by political "bases." I want Presidential candidates to reflect the values of the voters as a whole. Not those of the most partisan and doctrinaire liberals or conservatives. Power to the people. Not the parties.

I don't think the chance of very close elections, and contested vote totals will be that much greater than it is now. Individual states--i.e., "swing states"-- won't matter as much. Smart candidates should try to campaign in more places. Because every vote counts. Every vote, no matter where it comes from--big state or small state--adds to his/her total. No one is effectively disenfranchised. As happens now with the obsolete and undemocratic EC. This is the biggest advantage of all and vastly outweighs the risks of change.

 

[Albion]

It's much less likely to be an issue if nominee are chosen in a national primary. All contenders, from all parties, and independents, run against each other a few months before the November election.

By ranked choice voting, the field is narrowed to the 2 most preferred candidates nationally. Who could be from the same party, or different parties, or independents. Whatever the voters decide. These 2 are the final nominees. They chose running mates and the campaigns proceed as they do now. Theirs will be the only names on every state's Presidential ballot.

This is not at all how the ranked-choice advocates I have heard from describe the way voting would be handled under that system.

 

[jayem]

This is not at all how the ranked-choice advocates I have heard from describe the way voting would be handled under that system.

Sure. I posted my opinion on where ranked choice voting would be useful.

 

[Albion]

Sure. I posted my opinion on where ranked choice voting would be useful.

That's not what caught my attention. Rather, it was that your description of how the system would work is much different from the proposal that other advocates of Ranked Choice describe. I wasn't taking sides.

 

[Richard T]

Do they have to have a certain amount of votes to get elected? If so then everyone could write in their choice and no one would get elected. I am going to write in Condoleezza Rice. She's great. I know it will be a wasted vote unless one has to have a minimum amount of votes.
The dems seem to have it this time so all we can do is hope that his VP will be to all's liking as he won't be able to handle the job for long.

There are rules in most states for write-in candidates. Here is an example for Colorado. "Any person who wishes to be a write-in candidate for any office greater than a county office must file an Affidavit of Intent with the Colorado Secretary of State. [1]"

 

[MorkandMindy]

An independent Presidential candidate, neither a Democrat nor Republican, will probably face a funding problem. It's unlikely he/she will have the resources to mount a competitive national campaign. ...

To get the funding they need enough support from the lobbyists / big business, so they have to be corrupt.

Any candidate in the system we have who is not a corrupt opportunist is just not going to have the funding.

So we always have a choice between corrupt opportunists.

 

[Albion]

Do they have to have a certain amount of votes to get elected? If so then everyone could write in their choice and no one would get elected. I am going to write in Condoleezza Rice. She's great. I know it will be a wasted vote unless one has to have a minimum amount of votes.
The dems seem to have it this time so all we can do is hope that his VP will be to all's liking as he won't be able to handle the job for long.

?? Your profile says you identify with the Constitution Party, but you say you won't be voting for the Party or its nominee for Prez??

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Nader voters were left-side and would prefer D over R by large margin. And if I am wrong in this case. either way, the spoiler principle is well understood and not controversial.

Plenty of left-of-center voters consider D and R to be equally bad - those are the kind of voters that the Green Party appeals to.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

He would do well to select Liz Warren. She's the only one with the chops to take over as POTUS. However he seems to be committed to a black woman.

I don't think he's committed to a black woman. Top 3 at the moment are probably Harris, Warren, and Duckworth - only one of them is black.

 

[durangodawood]

Plenty of left-of-center voters consider D and R to be equally bad - those are the kind of voters that the Green Party appeals to.

Many G's consider D's inadequate. Very few consider D and R equally bad.

R supporters like to cheerlead for D spoilers, and vice versa. Nothing new here. It just more evidence that 3rd party votes are in fact spoilers rather than affecting anything.

 

[timothyu]

The caveat is that our form of government will only work with a responsible citizenry.

If the citizens were responsible they would demand the government served them instead of the institutions. Over the years they seem to have lost sight they are in charge, not the money, and the institutions are happy to keep it that way.

 

[durangodawood]

If the citizens were responsible they would demand the government served them instead of the institutions. Over the years they seem to have lost sight they are in charge, not the money, and the institutions are happy to keep it that way.

I dont think so. People are still people and easily swayed just like they always were. Its more that the institutions have been given more freedom to spend the $$$ to do it. And the tools of disinformation are sharper than ever.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

If the citizens were responsible they would demand the government served them instead of the institutions. Over the years they seem to have lost sight they are in charge, not the money, and the institutions are happy to keep it that way.

I opt for cooperation between citizens and government. The less we depend on gov't the better. Regarding who's in charge, we have such freedoms here that it isn't even a topic for debate.

 

[Tiberius Lee]

The candidates lobbyists and the rich pick are ones who will do the most for them and the least for everyone else.

Ever wonder why there's no one to vote for? The multi-zillionaires own both parties and pick both candidates, and when they get in, the politicians move Trillions of dollars up the the very rich.

If you're in the part of the economic spectrum I'm in, even a small medical bill is more than I earn in a year. The money keeps getting sucked up the economic ladder.

Let me get some facts straight. No one picked anyone. Despite how much I disagree with Trump, he was nominated by his party in 2016 by primary voter. Majority primary voter voted for him. This time no one really challenged him so by default he is the nominee.

On the democratic side.. many people ran including Young .. but majority voted for Biden. No , Biden didn’t get picked in the back of Nancy Pelosi’s office or Obama’s living room by “few billionaire wearing darth vader mask” , but Biden won the primary because majority voter voted for him.

So stop making up facts when they don’t exist. No one picked any one .. both candidate are nominated by majority voter. Just because you don’t like the outcome , you don’t have right to make up facts!

America is a democracy and you can vote for whomever you want!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Let me get some facts straight. No one picked anyone. Despite how much I disagree with Trump, he was nominated by his party in 2016 by primary voter. Majority primary voter voted for him. This time no one really challenged him so by default he is the nominee.

On the democratic side.. many people ran including Young .. but majority voted for Biden. No , Biden didn’t get picked in the back of Nancy Pelosi’s office or Obama’s living room by “few billionaire wearing darth vader mask” , but Biden won the primary because majority voter voted for him.

So stop making up facts when they don’t exist. No one picked any one .. both candidate are nominated by majority voter. Just because you don’t like the outcome , you don’t have right to make up facts!

America is a democracy and you can vote for whomever you want!

I picked Biden from the getgo. Now I'm picking Warren for his VP.

 

[returntosender]

There are rules in most states for write-in candidates. Here is an example for Colorado. "Any person who wishes to be a write-in candidate for any office greater than a county office must file an Affidavit of Intent with the Colorado Secretary of State. [1]"

I've written in before. It is just a takeaway vote unless you can get thousands to do the same. I am not sure of the write in policy but there was nothing on the ballet as to policy so I figured it was counted as 1 vote minus thousands = zero.

 

[returntosender]

?? Your profile says you identify with the Constitution Party, but you say you won't be voting for the Party or its nominee for Prez??

I have always voted for the man not the party. I had no idea what the C party was but Rep. or independent was not offered here. I'll go back and check to see if they have added them.thx! BTW, I don't debate.

 

[returntosender]

sorry.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Many G's consider D's inadequate. Very few consider D and R equally bad.

Jill Stein went as far as to say that Hillary Clinton was more dangerous than Donald Trump in that she was likely start a war Russia...

 

[durangodawood]

Jill Stein went as far as to say that Hillary Clinton was more dangerous than Donald Trump in that she was likely start a war Russia...

Yeah a lot of people were caught up in Russia based disinformation leading up to the election.