[GCFL-discuss] Our voices

[gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net]

Wow Siarlys, that's an AWESOME! suggestion! I like that idea VERY
much. Reads like you put much thinking into this proposal and I very
much agree with it.

God bless you,
Lance

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:59:40 -0500, gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net
<gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> wrote:
> It is that time of year again when the media begin to tell us that people
> in both parties, or at both ends of this or that polarization, have "more
> disdain for the candidate they oppose than affection for the guy they
> support" and that we are all saying "I wish there was someone else I
> could vote for."
> 
> The media are great at telling what "the people" are thinking, not so
> good at telling us what the candidates are doing and saying, so WE (the
> people) can decide what is important to us in deciding how to vote.
> 
> But our current process does produce a lot of disillusionment and "what
> ifs," so in the interest of ending it all, and giving greenBubble the
> freedom to vote his conscience in a practical sort of way, I propose the
> following for 2008:
> 
> 1) Every state will hold a primary election between August 1 and October
> 15. Which states get which dates during the time period will be
> determined by lottery, each election. Anyone can be on the primary ballot
> in any state where they turn in petitions signed by 1/2 % of the total
> voters in that state for the last general presidential election. They can
> have a party label next to their name, but no party categories to the
> primary. Each voter in the state can cast one vote for any candidate they
> choose.
> 
> 2) The general election ballot will be the same nationwide. It will list
> the top four candidates nationwide after all the votes from all the
> states are counted, PLUS anyone else who came in first (plurality) in at
> least 25 states -- if they are not already among the top four. Voting
> will be by order of preference: you number each candidate from one to
> four, or five if there are five candidates left. This will be on a PAPER
> ballot designed to he scanned and tabulated by computer (which is how we
> do it now in Wisconsin) -- leaving a paper record in the event of
> challenges, recounts, fraud, etc.
> 
> The first place choices will be counted. If anyone has a majority, they
> are our next president. If not, the ballots for whoever got the least
> first place choices get redistributed according to second place choices
> of those voters. (Not hard with a computer scanned database). If anyone
> has a majority, they are president. If not, whoever is now in last place
> gets their ballots redistributed by second or, where necessary, third
> place choices. Etc.
> 
> The winning candidate will be the closest to what more of the people are
> willing to live with, and farthest from what most of the people refuse to
> accept, that is possible in a majority-rule election set-up.
> 
> I haven't figured out how to deal with vice-president, but these days the
> nominees more or less pick them anyway. The convention votes are a
> formality. So, let the top four pick whoever they want from among those
> who qualified for the ballot in at least 25 states during the primary,
> and ANNOUNCE that choice to go on the ballot WITH their own names in the
> general election ballot.
> 
> The principles are simple. Writing it into law would be complicated, but
> not hard work. Its complicated, because we would have to anticipate all
> the absurd arguments some idiot would try to go to court with, and
> explicitly rule them out.
> 
> The only reason we couldn't have this in place in 2008 is, almost all the
> people who would have to vote on a constitutional amendment (senators,
> congress reps, state legislators) have a vested interest in keeping
> things the way they are.
> 
> Siarlys
> 
> All first place votes will be counted