Republican/Liberal

[FrontLine]

Neither republican or democrat. Socially liberal, economic conservative.

 

[Avon]

all the main uk parties are fairly middling these days so it doesnt matter too much.

so i usually close my eyes and hope i dont tick the box for the bnp. (i accidentally voted communist once this way)

 

[The Green Mushroom]

I'm pretty sure in France candidates are chosen by the parties without any input from non-members (and becoming a member involves more than just declaring yourself so like in the US). I think you must be thinking of some other country, although I don't know which. The primary system as it exists in the USA is more democratic in that regard than the election systems in Europe, which probably makes up for the lack of competition from third/fourth/fifth/etc. parties to some degree.

Personally I have no problem with a group of people who share political views deciding who their group will represent by a means of its choosing--ie the party choosing its own candidates.

But I also referred to Louisiana where parties do not run primaries and anyone who gets on the ballot can state which party they support--which is not necessarily which party supports them. This voting system is often called a "Jungle Primary" for a reason as people in the same party will often fight each other as much the other party during the general campaign.

By ranking the candidates, I mean that your vote would go to your second choice if your first choice didn't win. In the current system, if you vote for a third party candidate you are most likely giving your vote to your least favorite candidate, which discourages people from voting for anybody but Coke and Pepsi.

That's pretty much what I thought--Alternate Vote aka the Instant Runoff Voting system. It may be better than first past the post, but I still prefer having an actual runoff unless something goes wrong. While it would be unlikely to happen for me, if a person changes their mind after casting an AV ballot they are stuck with the thought that their vote ended up putting their fifth choice candidate in ahead of their sixth choice. With a real runoff election they would have a week or two to decide which of the surviving candidates they want to vote for, knowing that one of them will get in with a certainty.

If party acts stupid but the other acts very tactically you could have situation where 60% of people vote for the various Coke products, but Diet Pepsi gets elected because he was the highest ranked choice after Coke on everyone's ballot. Diet Pepsi might not even make the runoff (which I will admit is a vote in AV's favor) giving the people a choice between which Cherry Coke and Diet Coke in the second round.

AV--Rank everybody and hope that your third least favorite candidate gets in over your least favorite candidate.

Runoff--Pick the best candidate or at least the candidate you think would most likely finish second then get to choose again, even if it is between your third and fourth choices.

I prefer runoffs to AV. But that's just my opinion and I could be wrong. Almost anything is better than first past the post.

 

[Dr. Chandra]

Conservative Republican.

Same here.

 

[Sector 7]

Moderate, Independent. I lean more right economically and more left socially. I hate banks, the oil companies and organized religious institutions.

Your statement describes me perfectly. I used to be a conservative Republican, met Ronald Reagan, worked on his campaign in college. Eventually, after admitting to myself that I was gay, I realized that my own party hated the real me. It bothered me to the point I eventually registered as an Independent.

I also tend to be moderate, voting conservatively on some issued, but socially more liberal. While abortion is appalling to me personally, because it ends a life, I am also against prosecution of those who choose abortion. I vote for those who seem to believe in equal rights for all-- including gay marriage. (All marriages are civil unions in the US, since you have to apply for a marriage license from the government... even if the actual ceremony is held in a church.)

 

[Canadave]

I'm a member of the New Democratic Party, which is Canada's social democratic party. So in the broadest terms, I'm a socialist.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

Neither.

 

[Lowdarzz]

I'm a moderate conservative and will never register with a party so I vote for whomever I think has the best ability to get the job done.

Unfortunately this time around the field is full of stinkers and while I liked Huntsman, I think the only reason he was running this time around was for name recognition in the future.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^Sounds like the Alternative Vote system. Which was rejected by UK voters in a 2011 referendum opting to stick with First Past the Post. Whether you agree with the outcome or not it put the issue about voting reform to bed for at least a generation.

Election reform in the US is a hard sell because it would reduce the power of the Democratic and Republican parties-- and guess who would be voting on election reform?

 

[MacLeod]

^why do you think it failed in the UK. The 2 main parties campaigned against it.

 

[MacLeod]

Fair enough. I actually agree with your questions: they are important and they need to be answered. Thanks for the polite discussion. European policy can be emotionally charged, it's nice to have a frank exchange of opinions without it devolving into an argument.

You're welcome. When the debate about the EU devolves into an argument both sides lose out as neither side is then willing to listen to the other.

 

[JB2005]

^why do you think it failed in the UK. The 2 main parties campaigned against it.

Because it wasn't the proportional representation that anyone wanted - it was a stopgap to test the water...the yes campaign were basically saying "well we don't want it, but if you vote it in then we'll be able to change it to something else"

Of course the AV campaign did bring back Alan B'Stard, so it wasn't all bad!

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aUxilWb2Og[/yt]

 

[Bob Karo]

I'm a Classical Liberal with no party affiliation.

 

[Pingfah]

all the main uk parties are fairly middling these days so it doesnt matter too much.

so i usually close my eyes and hope i dont tick the box for the bnp. (i accidentally voted communist once this way)

Why even waste the effort on the walk to the polling station, or posting the card then? If you consider the choice to be irrelevant, then so is voting for one.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^why do you think it failed in the UK. The 2 main parties campaigned against it.

Yeah, I can imagine. The only way to make it happen is to get it on the ballot so that people can vote for it directly.

 

[Pingfah]

^ They did vote for it directly, we had a public referendum which was attached to local election ballots in most places. Everybody voted no, because the Tories spent a fortune of their own money discrediting it. Just a year earlier it was polling with a big majority in favour of it.

Amazing what a garishly coloured, fearmongering leaflet campaign can do.

AV was the only real point to having a coalition, and the Libs fucked it up. As far as I am concerned the coalition can burn now, and the sooner the better.

 

[MacLeod]

^Well you'll have to wait until 07-05-15 before you'll have a chance to vote the Government out of office.

So we can elect another bunch of self serving politicans.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^ They did vote for it directly, we had a public referendum which was attached to local election ballots in most places. Everybody voted no, because the Tories spent a fortune of their own money discrediting it. Just a year earlier it was polling with a big majority in favour of it.

And the same thing would likely happen here-- but it's the only chance of it happening. Congress would never support it on its own.

 

[MacLeod]

all the main uk parties are fairly middling these days so it doesnt matter too much.

so i usually close my eyes and hope i dont tick the box for the bnp. (i accidentally voted communist once this way)

Why even waste the effort on the walk to the polling station, or posting the card then? If you consider the choice to be irrelevant, then so is voting for one.

My view is that if you don't vote, then don't complain about the result.

I don't buy the argument that saying my vote won't count so why bother?

Firstly: Simply if everyone who thought that actually voted it might change the result.

Secondly: All it takes is for your preferred candidate to get exactly 1 vote more than the next person for them to be elected.

Don't want to vote for anyone, spoil your ballot paper, they do specify how many spoilt ballot papers each consitituency gets. So a few dozens vs potentialy a few thousands sends different messages.

Not voting sends the message you can't be bothered/don't care who wins

Spolit Ballots number in the tens/hundreds of thousands sends more of message that we do care, just not for any of you. It might cause the politicans to examine themselves and make changes.

 

[Kira's Mom]

Scorching liberal on most social issues, moderate to liberal on economics. Registered as a Democrat since I was old enough to vote, but have voted for more moderate Republicans locally.