This Sacramento Bee story says some well-funded Democratic interest groups are considering campaigning against some Democratic candidates for U.S. House in California, to lessen the chances that the top-two system will cause a complete absence of Democrats on the November ballot in some districts. Their fear is that too many Democratic candidates on the primary ballot means Democratic voters will split the vote, and put two Republicans on the November ballot. Thanks to California Politico for the link.
UPDATE: see this parallel story in the Los Angeles Times, which has more details. Thanks to Rick Hasen for that link.
The only news pluralists want to report on is division and this is the same psychology being promoted by all parties and news outlets.
Every cycle in USA politics is predictable but the United Coalition of Candidates has a better idea.
Our team is eager to work with everyone, the more the better, we never pick between one or another but we include the whole team by prioritization.
Now one CA SoS Peace and Freedom candidate CT Weber says he likes ALL candidates who support PPR so we will rank his name above Honorable Gail Lightfoot, bringing both names to the team, but giving him higher priority.
The Libertarians and Peace & Freedom parties are United by them and others and we love the day to day incremental improvements.
We aren’t self-destructing like all other plurality-based entities in California, because we’ve been collaborating successfully for more than twenty-three consecutive years and PPR works fine.
The party bosses have made sure that their division psychology, or “teamwork” by name only, but without and ballots cast as proof, and so the party bosses will only hurt us voters of the whole State.
The 7th California Parliament Election of 2018 will demonstrate to all who the best team players will be and not some plurality election which may follow in the days, weeks and months to follow.
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
Team player Mark Herd votes reverse order from James Ogle for UCC SoS candidates causing a tie.
Now the tie must be broken before 4/20 when the paper ballot must be prepared by me, creating a need for a third party, to break the tie.
On 4/22/2018, Earth Day, the final results will be made by counting paper ballots, which will be ready on 4/20/2018, from a clear ballot box from where the voters stuffed their marked paper ballots, for both of the candidates to watch and see the mathematically perfect totals in person, or to have someone the choose to represent them.
Nevermind, our top candidate, Andy Caffrey (Ecotopian Democratic) for CA CD 2 votes for CT Weber #2 after his own name #1 for United Coalition.
NO primaries.
PR and AppV
Instant runoff voting is needed not top2! Or if you want, modify the top2 system where voters must vote for 2 candidates.
@ James Ogle. The only real value that I have even found in your rants about your fantasy parliament, are when you name or list your parliament’s candidates. I find this very helpful to me in deciding which California candidates I will definitely NOT vote for.
RCV in single winner districts should be described as “top one”, since only the biggest group will ever win.
If you want to see inclusion and unity, then the Sainte Lague parliament seat distribution system, ranked choice voting in multiple winner districts, Hagen-Bach Bischoff method (percentages), is the best way which hasn’t been improved in more than 100 years.
How many folks will vote for the candidates opposed by those ***well-funded Democratic interest groups*** — ie free advertising for the former by the latter ???
No one said life is easy so we just do our jobs, keep humble and maybe if we work hard enough and if the chips fall our way then we may have a small chance to experience success within our lifetime.
For now we build our team, practice our art and don’t worry about the others.
Maybe instant runoff voting isnt progress but how about the following… voters give a first choice to a candidate and then a second choice to a candidate you want in a runoff (could be more than one)
Condorcet = RCV/IRV with correct math.
DemoRep:how about this idea? Voters are given a ballot with runoff options. Say you have 3 candidates: A, B and C. Your ballot would be like this:
– 1st A/2nd B
– 1st A/2nd C
– 1st B/2nd C
– 1st C/2nd A
– 1st C/2nd B
– 1st B/2nd A
Now, one thing I noticed is that irv eliminates the candidate with the least first preferences. But what if we eliminate the set with the least first preferences instead? Talk about changing things.