Apparently McCain had his delegates vote for Huckabee in West Virginia because McCain wasn't going to get them and he wanted to ensure Romney wouldn't.
So in effect, people who perhaps didn't want to vote for Huckabee ended up voting for ... Huckabee, so that Romney wouldn't come up with delegates.
I had to vote for Romney even though I wanted to vote for Thompson because I want to slow the McCain train. Thompson was de-selected by other states and the press before I got a chance to vote for him. I feel like McCain has been picked for me. This process is broken.
And I know how it could be much, much better. I likened it in an email to the AP coaches' polls.
I have my own idea for fixing this process. I wonder how I get it up to the powers that be. I'm sure some of the powers that be wouldn't like it, but this would probably get more people excited about the process and give all sides the candidates they are, as a group, the happiest with.This gets rid of "wasting my vote" syndrome and gives people all across the country a real, non-binary voice. Now you get to vote for who you really want AND who you sorta want. It's no longer a stark choice between who-you-want-only-if-he-or-she-can-beat-who-you-don't-want. You get a much more detailed picture of what people are thinking. And it gets reflected in the results.
First: All primaries are to be held on the same day, just like election day. This forces the candidates to campaign to the entire country and not pander to special interest groups in key states. Or not spend so much time pandering, at least.
Second: When we vote, we rank the candidates. Points are assigned and weighted in accordance with the candidate's ranking.
Third: Same thing with the general election. Here's where the plan can go one of two ways.
A) The presidential and vice presidential candidate gaining the highest point total wins
or
B) There are no vice-presidential candidates. The candidate with the second highest point total becomes the vice president. I see good and bad aspects of this idea, not the least of which is an incentive to assasinate the top dog. Something tells me, though, that in the early days of the country this is how it was done anyway.
My original idea is A).
This also inhibits the ability of the press to steer the election by speculating on and spinning results from the early primaries.
I think people would flock to the polls AND be happier with the results.
On the way home I heard this type of election called a "run off" election. So be it.
Even if you couldn't get it established as the process for the general election right away, I'd sure be happy if at least the Republicans would decide that this is what they are going to do.
How do we get this started? It is still our country, right? Of the people, by the people, for the people?
No comments:
Post a Comment