I am writing this article with three basic purposes in mind:
1.) to inspire voters to abandon their political parties, party politics and all the related ills; and instead, register as an independent and vote as an independent voter;
2.) to inspire voters to support and implement range voting; let's replace our current plurality voting system with a range voting system.
3.) Range voting ELIMINATES over-voting and spoiled ballots - a fraudster's paradise.
I could easily pontificate all day as to the virtues of abandoning your political party and registering as an independent voter and and voting for party-free candidates; instead, I present to you our Founding Fathers' words and thoughts on "party politics" and non-plural voting.
With Range Voting 2-party dominance should be lessened, consistent with the expressed wish of George Washington.
A prescient quote from George Washington's final "farewell" presidential address in 1796:I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party.
But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
Conclusion: "Washington thought political parties and political party dominance was a very bad idea. He wanted it to be about the best candidate winning. Not about 2 parties taking over and preventing all other parties – no matter how good their candidates – from having a chance. Makes you wonder whether Washington is spinning in his grave." - Clay S.
A quote from Abraham Lincoln shortly before he was killed:I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country... corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. – Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) letter to Colonel William F. Elkins, 21 Nov 1864.
Do you think Lincoln's prophecy of moneyed/corporate-powered political corruption and control came true? Two parties makes for a much more-easily-corrupted government than if we had some real competition going on.
For all of his good intentions, former Nirvana bassist turned political activist Krist Novoselic is rallying behind a broken cause in Instant Runoff Voting, under the false belief that IRV will prevent wasted votes and spoiler candidates. He should also be aware that IRV has resulted in two-party domination in all four countries where it has been extensively used: Australia, Ireland, Malta, and Fiji (we might have been able to add the US to that list, except that almost all of the two dozen US cities to have implemented IRV--the largest being New York City in 1936-- later backslid to plurality). So with all the support Novoselic has shown for third parties, he might want to stop supporting a voting system that is _lethal_ to them.
One thing is certain. We need a better voting method than plurality, if our species intends to survive the impact of looming threats such as global warming, overpopulation, and the end of cheap oil. But Novoselic is suffering the effects of mass propaganda if he thinks IRV is answer. There is something better, but first let's take a closer look at this IRV hype.
Consider the following hypothetical election results:
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
