- Thread starter
- #361
That's one of the most pathetic excuses I've seen.No, the reason we have a binary choice every election is money in politics. People want to bet on a winner, not an also ran
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That's one of the most pathetic excuses I've seen.No, the reason we have a binary choice every election is money in politics. People want to bet on a winner, not an also ran
It's not an excuse. It's an explanation. There was no value judgment made.That's one of the more pathetic excuses I've seen.
It's an evasion. Partisans love lesser-of-two-evils. It's how they make hay.It's not an excuse. It's an explanation. There was no value judgment made.
No, it's the reason you have a binary choice in each election. Big money in politics.It's an evasion. Partisans love lesser-of-two-evils. It's how they make hay.
LOL - RCV gets rid of the lesser-of-two-evils conceit. Why does that scare you?No, it's the reason you have a binary choice in each election. Big money in politics.
This is what it looks like to identify real reasons, instead of just saying everything sucks and pointing at everyone and telling them to do better.
It doesn't. Settle down.LOL - RCV gets rid of the lesser-of-two-evils conceit. Why does that scare you?
We got here because the two-parties have conned people into voting for their bad candidates with the lesser-of-two-evils nonsense.It doesn't. Settle down.
It also doesn't speak to my point at all. I described how we got here.
Nope. 100% wrong. People perceive a binary choice, because that is the mathematical reality in each election, Irrespective of the quality of the candidates.We got here because the two-parties have conned people into voting for their bad candidates with the lesser-of-two-evils nonsense.
That doesn't even address what I said. Why are you defending LO2E?Nope. 100% wrong. People perceive a binary choice, because that is the mathematical reality in each election, Irrespective of the quality of the candidates.
It directly addresses your false claim and totally undermines it.That doesn't even address what I said. Why are you defending LO2E?
LOL - stow the trolling. I can't care.I didn't defend anything. Try to focus, you're falling apart a little bit.
??? What are you going on about? English?Maine and Alaska use RCV for bigresspeple. Their congresspeolle are democrats and Republicans.
?So how do I square the facts of reality with your claim that RSV is the solution, without fling your claim in the fiction section?
It was a typo.What are you going on about? English?
Not in the places where it is actually used, like Maine and Alaska.RCV nullifies LO2E
I couldn't discern any "points". Care to try again?It was a typo.
And you dodged my points. Expected
Yeah, it does get rid of LO2E. You seem fixated on RCV as a vehicle for third party candidates. That's NOT the point. In most cases, as you are pointing out, there will still be two dominant parties. But it takes away the incentive for all the fear mongering and lets people actually vote their conscience.Not in the places where it is actually used, like Maine and Alaska.
A weak lie.I couldn't discern any "points".
*Except for where it is actually used in theYeah, it does get rid of LO2E.
What are you talking about? RCV nullifies LO2E, wherever it's actually used. This is a fact about the process - not a matter of opinion.*Except for where it is actually used in the
US
Not really.It doesn't. Settle down.
It also doesn't speak to my point at all. I described how we got here.
The win of RCV, in my view, isn't getting rid of two strong, opposed parties. And it doesn't necessarily do that. It gets rid of the lesser-of-two-evils sales pitch. It gets rid of the incentive to vote for a bad candidate to prevent another, supposedly worse, candidate from winning. There's no need for it.Not really.
Money is not much of a description of anything. Everything can be connected to money in one form or another and publicly funded elections do absolutely nothing to diminish a 2 party system.
Money has nothing to do with why we have 2 parties, our system is set up in a manner that almost necessitates it.