« Back to story "Nader Wins First Amendment Ballot Access Case | Politicususa"

Story Comments

Posted by: berkeley 9 months, 4 weeks ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

100%
berkeley9 months, 4 weeks ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

all of the rules that restrict third parties, as the article shows, are written by the dems and repubs working together to keep them out.

instant runoff voting allows individuals, not simply parties, a fair chance at winning.

for instance, ross perot got 20 million votes (19%) in 1992, drawing from both the dems and repubs. how many more people would have voted for him had instant runoff voting been in place?

i feel the same was true for the 2000 election. both parties did their best to discredit nader because they didn't want their monopoly challenged.

historically, third parties have not gained power because of the forces waged against them, rather than their merits.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
0 Replies

loading ...