Post a commentToo often, a choice between Republican and Democrat is no choice at all. Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.
The democratic party in Pennsylvania has long opposed real choice for the voters. As just another example, they aggressively attacked Nader's candidacy for president a in 2004.
I assume the difference in signatures needed to get on the ballot is a factor of percentage of vote garnered by the party in some number of past elections. And I can agree with that---too easy access can make for a very complex, and silly, ballot. However, due to our voting system, so many view voting for third party candidates as a "wasted" vote which means the bar will always be high since the vote is biased. Here's the solution: instant run-off voting. IRV allow all voters to order candidates instead of just voting for one. You count everyone's first choice---if there is no 50%+1 winner, you drop the lowest vote-getter and assign those votes to their ballot's second choice. Repeat. Now, you can assign party viability based on number of first-round votes garnered and you suddenly have real, viable, third-parties.
3 comments
