Who Are You Voting For?

[MagicManICT]

You know, if you use the proper search terms, nobody will even notice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... succession

[barra]

It would be virtually impossible for him to win like that. All he'd be doing is making Hillary lose. Splitting votes does your side no good in an all or nothing game.

I'm sure you're familiar with preferential voting. It works here, but it's hard to introduce because the two existing parties have nothing to gain unless they have a huge divide within. Would it be considered in the future if the Democrats are sabotaged by Bernie running third party, or if Trump loses the convention and does the same to the GOP?

[TeckXKnight]

Gotta admit that sounds exclusively better than our current system if only because it makes candidates appeal to more than just swing states.

[Aperson]

It would be virtually impossible for him to win like that. All he'd be doing is making Hillary lose. Splitting votes does your side no good in an all or nothing game.

I'm sure you're familiar with preferential voting. It works here, but it's hard to introduce because the two existing parties have nothing to gain unless they have a huge divide within. Would it be considered in the future if the Democrats are sabotaged by Bernie running third party, or if Trump loses the convention and does the same to the GOP?

democracy

[GenghisKhan44]

It would be virtually impossible for him to win like that. All he'd be doing is making Hillary lose. Splitting votes does your side no good in an all or nothing game.

I'm sure you're familiar with preferential voting. It works here, but it's hard to introduce because the two existing parties have nothing to gain unless they have a huge divide within. Would it be considered in the future if the Democrats are sabotaged by Bernie running third party, or if Trump loses the convention and does the same to the GOP?

That sounds AWESOME.

The only trouble is: how do we make it happen? I'm not entirely sure it's possible at this point.

[MagicManICT]

Every state has write-in candidates. They have to. It's required by federal law. Whether or not a candidate has to be registered as a candidate does vary by state. For example, if Mickey Mouse isn't a registered write-in candidate in my state, my vote for him won't count come November. (I'm going off memory on this.The class I learned this in was about 20 years ago, so pardon if I'm not completely accurate.)

To note, this is more or less how things started in the US. Washington warned about two party politics as it was already devolving into that in the few short years we had been a country already. The screwy thing is... with as large as this country is, we don't see more than two parties with a rare exception (Whigs who became the Republicans in the 1840s and 50s, an occasional Libertarian). At the local levels, you just have different flavors of Democrat or Republican--Tea Party Republican in the Bible Belt and Midwest. More or less Socialist Democrat in New England and Environmental Democrats in the West Coast.

What's even worse is you have people that can't look at all the issues. Abortion is still legal? Nope, can't vote for anyone but Mr. Christian Coalition that's on the ballot, even if the dumb ass GOP candidate is just pandering to the right to get those votes.

Maybe voting needs to be more like these Facebook personality quizes. You don't get to see your result until you've filled out a 10-20 questionnaire. Your answers are then matched up with the best candidate.

[Ysh]

Maybe voting needs to be more like these Facebook personality quizes. You don't get to see your result until you've filled out a 10-20 questionnaire. Your answers are then matched up with the best candidate.

Unless you will want for this to force you to voting the candidate you are matching with, they can already do this thing with some existing websites services. And if you do want this to be how the vote is done, I do not think some external body to decide who I will vote for is a good idea. The problem is people will be stupid and vote for one issue or not even become doing any research at all. Most voters I think will be uninformed, despite the cyberweb being a thing they will use every day.

[Jalpha]

Isn't that what already occurs? Who actually does research and doesn't just rely on an information stream supplied to them by media and advertising. Certainly not the majority.

[Burinn]

I'm getting really sick of Hillary Clinton's voter manipulation. Sanders should have won New York.

[Humbaz]

... your democracy is cake.