Almost all elections in the United States from U.S. Senator to Township Supervisor are “single member district, winner take all.” If there are three candidates running, and candidate A gets 40% of the vote, candidate B gets 35% of the vote, and candidate C garners 25%, candidate A wins the election.
If you are supporting Candidate C and a poll is taken one week before the election, you’d be stupid to vote for your candidate. You’d pick A or B–whichever one you think would be the lesser of two evils.
There is another reason. Republicans and Democrats agree on very little, but they will almost always make it difficult for third parties to gain a foothold. Petitioning requirements will be onerous and the threshold for gaining official party status will usually be high, whether the legislature is Republican or Democratic.
Anti-third party sentiment extends to the Courts. Here is an analysis from “Ballot Access News,” a newsletter devoted to Third Party legal issues:
Justices appointed by Democratic presidents seem to think that minor party and independent candidates hurt the Democratic Party. Justices appointed by Republican presidents seem to have a strong urge to never rule against states in constitutional law cases.
In some future post I’ll explain why proportional representation is probably not the best answer to this unfair situation, but ranked choice voting may be just the solution.
(The “Ballot Access News” quote is from the March 1, 2021 issue, Vol. 36, No. 10).
No comments:
Post a Comment