How about THIS for 3rd choice on your ballots?

[flacaltenn]

Actually NOTA is ALREADY on a bunch of state primary ballots. And a bunch of state general ballots.

‘None of the above’ beats out all Demo governor candidates in Nevada

In that election NOTA BEAT all the 10 or Dem Governor candidates. It's not a head fantasy of mine. People should see how this is ALREADY working and think about IMPROVING it..

I mean the other part about nominating new candidates and starting the process all over again.

Who is going to serve as POTUS in the meantime? Obama? Joe Biden?

You move the 1st General Election up to Oct. Give the parties 30 days to submit new slates. Do it again in Nov...

Kind of short notice, no?

Not really. Once it was common practice, the parties could declare alternate slates at their conventions. OR just take their chances and fight it out in 30 days with small arms and hand grenades as far as I'm concerned.

So you are saying they should have "back-up" candidates lined up? Well, who's to say those candidates would be any better? My main reason for not wanting to vote for either party is because I want them both to be knocked down and put an end to this duopoly.

That's my ideal also. But having a NOTA vote MEAN something could be a temporary adjustment to getting people to really vote their conscience. If the 2 tired old parties can not up come with a "reserved slate" of qualified candidates -- they really would be incompetent to lead.

 

[CowboyTed]

Why not just use Single Transfer Vote...

I have been saying this everytime someone comes up with one scheme or another...

This has been solved worldwide and allows many candidates and the best one comes out on top...

If that is similar to "Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) -- it doesn't work very well when you just have 2 choices to begin with. Would work for local or maybe state elections. But to get it to work on National ballots, you'd have to prepare RESERVED candidate alternates OR make the Prez and Vice-Prez choices independent choices.

It is not instant runoff but has kind of similarity...

People put there name on the ballot. You have a way making sure not everyone can put their name..

Most countries have a way of limiting to say 15 candidates... In US case Signatories(3million) or state nominations (3), Congressmen(40)...

Any method would be allowed...

So you get 15 names... The Major Parties would normally want to run two-three each as a party strategy...

So when you vote you vote in order of preference, 1 for your favourite, 2 for your 2nd favourite and so on down the ticket to say 15...

When counting starts the count all the 1st preference first.

They then discount who came last and count his/her next preference vote and distribute it to the remaining candidates. This is the second count...

You continue until there is only two candidates left and the one with the most votes wins....

There is an example of one here in Ireland. Irish presidential election, 2011 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What it allows for is one election... Primaries have far less influence as they are only the party nominations and people can vote for who they like... They don't have to worry that their favourite candidate has a chance or not because if the loose in early count you next preferences are taken until you end up with either the candidate who wins or comes second (assuming you keep voting down the ticket).

It gives the best of both worlds...

There is outstanding issues about the electorate collage and VP but they could be incorporated by slight adjustments on the same premise...

But in this election it could mean Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and John Kasich are on the ticket in November... Each Candidate tries and do deals to ask their supporters to vote next preference to a candidate they would support if they are not in it...
This also brings civility to campaigns, you don't insult other candidates out of hand because their supporters next preference are going to be needed by you when they get discounted. By its natural it promotes unity...

 

[Kosh]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Brewsters Millions?

 

[OnePercenter]

None of the above: You're throwing your vote away.

Republican vote: Against promoting the middle class.

Democratic vote: Pro-middle class.

 

[guno]

Washington continues to advance his idea of the dangers of sectionalism and expands his warning to include the dangers of political parties to the government and country as a whole. His warnings took on added significance with the recent creation of the Democratic-Republican Party by Jefferson, to oppose Hamilton's Federalist Party, which had been created a year earlier in 1791, which in many ways promoted the interest of certain regions and groups of Americans over others A more pressing concern for Washington, which he references in this portion of the address, was the Democratic-Republican efforts to align with France and the Federalist efforts to ally the nation with Great Britain in an ongoing conflict between the two European nations brought about by the French Revolution.

While Washington accepts the fact that it is natural for people to organize and operate within groups like political parties, he also argues that every government has recognized political parties as an enemy and has sought to repress them because of their tendency to seek more power than other groups and take revenge on political opponents. Washington had thought that disagreements between political parties weakened the government.

Moreover, Washington makes the case that "the alternate domination" of one party over another and coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponents have led to horrible atrocities, and "is itself a frightful despotism

George Washington's Farewell Address - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Luddly Neddite]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Why not just write in your choice or stay home?

Or are you saying that RWNJ traitors aren't smart enough to figure that out?

 

[ChrisL]

None of the above: You're throwing your vote away.

Republican vote: Against promoting the middle class.

Democratic vote: Pro-middle class.

Another partisan . . .

 

[ChrisL]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Why not just write in your choice or stay home?

Because his point is to force the parties to put forth better candidates.

 

[flacaltenn]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Why not just write in your choice or stay home?

Or are you saying that RWNJ traitors aren't smart enough to figure that out?

So you want LESS Democracy? Less voter participation? I'm amazed that "staying home" pops into people's heads as an incentive for the parties to STAND for things and offer REASONABLE candidates.

How is that gonna punish them for putting forward increasingly arrogant power hungry divisive candidates?

Don't think many of you feel the urgency YET -- but you will..

 

[ChrisL]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Why not just write in your choice or stay home?

Or are you saying that RWNJ traitors aren't smart enough to figure that out?

So you want LESS Democracy? Less voter participation? I'm amazed that "staying home" pops into people's heads as an incentive for the parties to STAND for things and offer REASONABLE candidates.

How is that gonna punish them for putting forward increasingly arrogant power hungry divisive candidates?

Don't think many of you feel the urgency YET -- but you will..

Luddy is just another partisan hack.

 

[SwimExpert]

You cannot make a law to add votes for Sponge Bob to votes for Ricky Morty. Adding apples and oranges gives a general fruit sum.. The law would have to take each of those names seriously as individual candidate.

The point is for "NOTA" to send an election to the house, yes? It's not necessary for all those write-in votes to be attributed to the same person. All that is necessary is to deny a majority to any single person.

 

[flacaltenn]

You cannot make a law to add votes for Sponge Bob to votes for Ricky Morty. Adding apples and oranges gives a general fruit sum.. The law would have to take each of those names seriously as individual candidate.

The point is for "NOTA" to send an election to the house, yes? It's not necessary for all those write-in votes to be attributed to the same person. All that is necessary is to deny a majority to any single person.

I hope you know all this -- so I'm not gonna explain it to you. But to actually SCORE electoral votes you have to WIN a state. (or get a lot votes in the 3 or 4 states that are not winner take all). To "throw it into the house" -- you have to have a healthy MARGIN of electoral votes that denies 270 to any other candidate.

HOW TF do you do that if 42,134 vote for Dick Less and 21,854 vote for Tasty Pie? How do you COMBINE those write-ins to WIN anything? They are votes for DIFFERENT candidates. And neither of them is gonna win ANY electoral votes with Write-Ins SPLIT 2 or 85 ways..

If you're suggesting that we IGNORE the actual INTENT of those voters and just ASSUME they were angry disenfranchised NOTA voters -- that's unConstitutional.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

No. As much as I can understand the desire for a "vote of no confidence", it - much like Donald Trump's entire cultlike campaign - is simply momentary emotion winning out over logic and reason. There is no follow-up to it, let alone a practical end-game, which means it really accomplishes nothing.

Say you get a majority of people voting, "A pox on all your houses. I don't want any of them." Then what? How do we proceed when the winner is "None of the above"? Do we hold a new election with all-new candidates from every participating party? And if so, who runs the government in the meantime?

As our laws stand right now, a vote of no-confidence - or none of the above, if you prefer - would simply throw the entire question into the House of Representatives and let THEM choose our President. Perhaps you think that's a good idea right this second, because perhaps the current makeup therein would be inclined to decide in favor of the candidate you like. I have no idea. But again, that's very shortsighted, because the House won't always be under the same control.

Furthermore, all that means is that we STILL have either the turd sandwich or the bucket of slime - who sucked so bad that the entire country said, "Screw that" - as President, and all we've done is invest the power of the individual voters into the House, which means candidates can stop even pretending to appeal to voters and simply go to a system where the governing of our country is OPENLY about insider wheeling and dealing. The people will have traded in their only major power to control politicians - the ability to hire and fire them - in for a meaningless, empty symbolic gesture. If we want that, we can always just stand across the street from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and flip the bird.

Not hard at all to propose that the parties submit an alternate (2nd vote) slate. OR make the Prez and Vice-Prez independent votes. That way if NOTA throws it to the House or wins outright -- there's an option to give it 30 days for a campaign and vote again.

OR give the parties 30 days to come up with a new ticket and vote again. SOMETHING needs to be done to avoid voting OUT OF FEAR of the opposition.

Actually, it's quite hard to redo the entire primary/choosing nominees/preparing elections process, unless you favor a haphazard, slapdash approach to it, which I can't see as being any sort of improvement whatsoever. It would take months, at least. Did you really think the primary/campaign season was only as long as it is so that people could advertise and snipe at each other (although those things, in and of themselves, are necessary and not something we would want to do away with, however annoying they are)?

So meanwhile, what? Again, you have either the choice of the current officeholders remaining in office until such time as new ones are chosen, or you have the last resort which is currently in our laws, where the House of Representatives chooses our President instead of the voters.

Sorry, but this plan is nothing more than increased chaos in the name of style over substance. "By God, we'll show THEM!" Yeah, and then what?

 

[Cecilie1200]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

The write-in is the "NOTA" option. We see how often that is utilized.

Or people could also vote for the lesser parties on the ballot, which would have much the same effect. Also not happening much.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are actually lots of 3rd Party candidates on the ballot.

Once I voted for Ralph Nader because I could not stand anyone else on the ballot.

But these votes are all wasted.

Normally everyone must choose between the lesser of two weevils.

Bill worked hard to make Hillary look like a nice weevil at least.

Melania was a little lying weevil that reminded us that weevils of a feather flock together and that while you can take the EuroTrash out of the whore house, you can't take the whore house out of the EuroTrash.

"Wasted" = You're not on the WINNER bandwagon! Ehrmagerd! Yeah, whatever. The only "wasted" vote is the one not cast. Any vote actually cast is not "wasted", if one ignores the juvenile peer pressure and considers a vote what it truly is, ie. the naming of the candidate you like most.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The two establishment parties have elections so rigged in our country that short of a billionaire who can't be bought running the establishment parties have a lock on the White House. Oh wait, Trump

"Billionaire who can't be bought" = someone who is already owned beforehand. How do you think he GOT to be a billionaire without already having ties and loyalties to other rich people?

 

[Cecilie1200]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

The write-in is the "NOTA" option. We see how often that is utilized.

There's no real organization of that choice tho. You write in Howard Stern -- I write in Dale Earhnhart. Doesn't work to measure much of anything. Write-ins are for lazy and unqualified candidates.

o_0 What exactly do you want it to "measure"? A write-in vote is quite literally saying that you do not want any of the above. Even if you and I both write in two different people, the fact of the matter is that we both voted "none of the above." It's not difficult.

NOTA IS a write-in essentially. But with actual write-ins -- they are all tallied individually. With NOTA they are all tallied TOGETHER. Get the diff? You might technically "measure" dissent to the choices with a lot of write-in names -- but it would not ADD UP to singularly clear vote of "no thanks"..

And people need to stop THANKING the parties for offering such increasingly arrogant and divisive candidates.

Dunno about Swim, but I DON'T get any meaningful difference there at all.

What possible difference does it make if you have "some over here, some over there, more in the corner" or "lots right here", if they all amount to the exact same number of votes producing no winner?

I'd say no matter how the voters go about saying, "Fuck you" to the major parties, the parties still get the point. (This is not to say that they're paying any attention, but they do still get it.)

 

[Cecilie1200]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Sounds kind of . . . like something that would never happen. What happens in the meantime, Obama remains POTUS? Yikes.

Well, your plan would let the morons in the House of Representatives decide, so . . .

 

[Cecilie1200]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Sounds kind of . . . like something that would never happen. What happens in the meantime, Obama remains POTUS? Yikes.

Actually NOTA is ALREADY on a bunch of state primary ballots. And a bunch of state general ballots.

‘None of the above’ beats out all Demo governor candidates in Nevada

In that election NOTA BEAT all the 10 or Dem Governor candidates. It's not a head fantasy of mine. People should see how this is ALREADY working and think about IMPROVING it..

I mean the other part about nominating new candidates and starting the process all over again.

Who is going to serve as POTUS in the meantime? Obama? Joe Biden?

You move the 1st General Election up to Oct. Give the parties 30 days to submit new slates. Do it again in Nov...

Yeah, because THAT wouldn't cost a buttload of extra money, not to mention giving us a slate of candidates we've had no time to vet thoroughly enough to make a decision.

Might as well vote for Donald Trump if you're going to insist on gambling on a long shot that way.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A lot of you are too vested in "winning" to care about other ballot choices. So you might falsely believe in the "wasted vote" theory or just not understand the NEED for more ballot choice. If what you define as "winning" is encouraging and rewarding the bad choices the DEM/REP present -- then YOU and Charlie Sheen have the same definition of "winning"..

So can all that 3rd party noise. What about a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as your 3rd choice? If NOTA wins enough electoral votes to throw it into the House --- or win outright --- then the Parties have to present a 2nd choice of candidates and have a National do-over. Might have to move up the Nov. election, might have to change some laws, might have to do a LOT of things to get this as an option. But nobody is speaking the obvious plain truth in America yet. We have a National Crisis -- because of blind allegiance to "party" and "winning".

Would you like to have the choice to reject ALL the choices on the ballot?

Sounds kind of . . . like something that would never happen. What happens in the meantime, Obama remains POTUS? Yikes.

Actually NOTA is ALREADY on a bunch of state primary ballots. And a bunch of state general ballots.

‘None of the above’ beats out all Demo governor candidates in Nevada

In that election NOTA BEAT all the 10 or Dem Governor candidates. It's not a head fantasy of mine. People should see how this is ALREADY working and think about IMPROVING it..

I mean the other part about nominating new candidates and starting the process all over again.

Who is going to serve as POTUS in the meantime? Obama? Joe Biden?

You move the 1st General Election up to Oct. Give the parties 30 days to submit new slates. Do it again in Nov...

Kind of short notice, no?

Fla seems to think that there's no real effort or expense involved in putting together an entire national election. I guess we'll just print out ballots on office copiers, full of names of candidates the voters don't know from their left elbows, and run with it.