[EM] Conceiving a Democratic Electoral Process

Dave Ketchum davek at clarityconnect.com
Sun Jul 15 10:28:30 PDT 2012

On Jul 13, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Fred Gohlke wrote:

> Good Morning, Dave
> re: "Clones are a problem for Plurality, and primaries were
>     invented to dispose of clones within a party"
> I'm not sure what clones are, but imagine they are multiple  
> candidates who seek the same office.
Yes, and looking alike they must share the voters who agree - a  
disaster that is suppressible within a party via primaries in  
Plurality.  But primaries cannot suppress clones from different  
parties - one big reason for going to a better voting method.
> re: "Could say that if they have no voice they have no need of
>     anyone to speak to."
> Who has the right to make that judgment?  We can't say that until  
> those without a voice have a practical way to express themselves on  
> political issues.

I am not making a judgement.  Those not ready to speak have no need  
for "a practical way to express themselves".
> re: "If there is an idea worth speaking about and no party is
>     interested, its backers could form a party."
> Forming a party is the height of futility, as I'm sure you're  
> aware.  As long as the major parties write the rules for our  
> electoral process, we will continue to have a closed system.

Slavery was worth speaking about in the early US - and sufficient for  
speaking about.  So the Republican party was born.  Soon they became a  
major party able to elect presidents, in a two-party system where the  
Whigs were soon forgotten.

Such as the Greens and Libertarians claim to have worthy ideas.
> Fred

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list