CVD wants Alt.V to be fairer but it isn't: misleading website

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

CVD is more than a little unhappy with Plurality (FPP) (i.e. minority rule 
for single winner offices).

U.S.A. voters are rather simple minded regarding math due to the massively 
rotten public schools.    

Thus, Condorcet (head to head) math is somewhat difficult for lots of 
ex-public school folks (notwithstanding the listings of various head to head 
matches of sports teams).

40 of the 50 U.S. States use plurality in primary elections. 10 have top 2 
runoff primary elections (to get some attempt at majority rule at least in 
primary nominees).  Many local governments have nonpartisan top 2N primary 
elections (N to be elected).

Few, if any, governments in the U.S. have runoff general elections if no 
candidate gets a majority (happening more often with more minor parties in 
more local elections).

The above is why I suggest a simple YES/NO vote for single winner offices 
(i.e. a variant of simple Approval) as the first (and only) step (until there 
is widespread usage of Number Voting (1, 2, etc.) for proportional 
representation elections) (to produce my suggested YES/NO, Number voting for 
head to head, and summing of place votes if there is no head to head winner).

The very dangerous and evil machinations of the 12th Amendment of the U.S. 
Constitution on 7 Nov 2000 may easily produce a U.S. President who gets 
elected in the infamous so-called *Electoral College* (538 partisan robot 
Electors, 270 majority) with a minority of the popular votes (by the real 
voters) AND gets less popular votes than the other major party candidate.

The resulting uproar may produce some immediate and very serious movement for 
election method reforms for such office (and thus other offices such as state 
governor, city mayors, etc.)-- i.e. the EM list should try and get its act 
together as an semi-emergency matter.