| A commonly-held belief is that Ralph Nader | | | | Therefore, if everyone who made candidate "A" |
| siphoned votes in 2000 and cost Vice-President Al | | | | his or her first choice also made candidate "D" the |
| Gore the election. The only reason I have trouble | | | | second choice, that 2% would go to candidate "D" |
| with that view is the fact that there were over | | | | giving them 51%, the plurality of votes. In the real |
| 2,000,000 people that voted for him. Ralph Nader | | | | world, not all of the 2% would have chosen |
| had, and has, the right to run for President. And | | | | candidate "D" as their second choice; however, If |
| anyone who votes had the right to vote for him. | | | | roughly half voted for "D" and half voted for "R," |
| Let us not allow politicians, the media, our | | | | then, in the end, one of them would still receive |
| neighbors, and ourselves to create any more | | | | over 50% of the popular vote. (And of course |
| animosity, or perpetuate the brainwashing and | | | | the Electoral College would have to be done away |
| conditioning that perpetuates the acceptance a | | | | with for this process to be implemented.) |
| two-party system as the sole form of | | | | Using that method, people would feel free to vote |
| Democracy. That's not what our country is based | | | | for a third-party candidate without fear of |
| on, and that is not the idea for which people have | | | | "siphoning" votes from their second choice, or |
| fought and died. | | | | "the lesser of two evils." Typically people in power |
| A new concept was stuck into my head today, | | | | don't like to give up their power, so it's less likely |
| again by my more intelligent friend. If we "siphon" | | | | that change would come from within, ie., there |
| enough votes to cause a panic among the two | | | | won't be any legislation proposed by either of the |
| dominating parties, it may be a wake-up call to | | | | two major political parties. The incentive, |
| them. In the past, I've held beliefs which match | | | | however, should have come in 2000. If the |
| many other people's feelings about voting "the | | | | Democrats felt the election was lost due to the |
| lesser of two evils." Basically, voting for a | | | | run of Ralph Nader, there should have been |
| third-party may make a statement, but a third | | | | discussion about instituting instant run-off voting |
| party candidate won't get elected so it's a wasted | | | | where a plurality of votes is needed to win. Why |
| vote. Countering that thought, the new point of | | | | was there no discussion? Possibly because |
| view I'm now considering regards the panic I | | | | Republicans held both houses of Congress until |
| mentioned. Essentially, if a Democrat or Republican | | | | 2006. But maybe there was a discussion and I |
| loses an election because of a third-party | | | | simply hadn't heard it. Even if it was proposed by |
| candidate, there's a possibility and the potential for | | | | Democrats, it would never have passed because |
| the introduction of new legislation: instant run-off | | | | they held the minority in the House and Senate. |
| voting during a general election, and the winner | | | | Regardless of the possibility of it passing, the |
| must have the plurality of votes. I'll attempt to | | | | issue could have been raised, and still could be |
| simplify this idea for those who are newbies to | | | | placed on a Democratic agenda. |
| politics and representative government. | | | | One major fault in the system currently: I read a |
| If done correctly and with The People's desires in | | | | rumor, possibly true, that some of Ralph Nader's |
| mind, instant run-off voting makes third-party | | | | funding came from Republicans. |
| candidates viable. Using instant run-off voting, the | | | | I would like to forget about politics, politicians, and |
| ballot gives two options for President, a first | | | | corrupt governments, but while I live on planet |
| choice and a second choice. If candidate "A" | | | | Earth, and while human nature dictates that |
| receives 2% of the popular vote, candidate "D" | | | | power will corrupt, I'll either have to bury my |
| receives 49%, and candidate "R" receives 49% | | | | head in the sand or just deal with it. |
| of the vote, none have the plurality of votes. | | | | |