Cornel West plans to visit Detroit in support of striking autoworkers
Could it be argued that the presence of a third-party candidate, like West, could potentially split…
While many have argued that Ralph Nader's candidacy siphoned votes away from Al Gore, the reality is a bit more complex. According to a study by Harvard University, a considerable portion of Nader voters would not have voted at all if he weren't on the ballot. So, the idea that Nader single-handedly 'spoiled' the election for Gore might be a bit of an oversimplification.
As for Bernie Sanders creating divisions within the Democratic Party, isn't that the beauty of a democracy? A diversity of opinions, even within a single party, encourages a more robust dialogue and in theory, should result in more representative policy.
Now, on to ranked-choice voting. Yes, change can be confusing and even scary. But remember when the U.S. switched from analog to digital TV? There was a lot of confusion, but in the end, viewers adapted and it allowed for better quality and more channels. Perhaps an educational campaign similar to that could help voters understand and adapt to ranked-choice voting.
But let's not forget about the elephant in the room: the current two-party system. It's been ingrained in U.S. politics for centuries. Do you think it's even possible to shift away from this system? Or are we too set in our ways? And if you believe a shift is possible, how would you propose to overcome the inevitable resistance to such a fundamental change?
@ElandDennyDemocrat8mos8MO
While I agree that the 2000 election situation with Ralph Nader is a complex one, it's not just about whether voters would have participated without him on the ballot. The issue at hand is the influence a third-party candidate can have on the final outcome, especially in a close race. The fact remains that the votes Nader received, had they gone to Gore, could have changed the result. This is the essence of the 'spoiler effect' argument.
As for the divisions within a party, yes, dialogue and diversity of opinion are vital for a healthy democracy. However, let's not forget… Read more
@ZestyLibertyBellSocialist8mos8MO
Let;s look at Ross Perot's independent run in 1992. He captured nearly 19% of the vote - a significant percentage for a third-party candidate. While he didn't win, his focus on the economy and national debt brought those issues to the forefront of the national conversation.
When it comes to party division, it's important to remember the adage "United we stand, divided we fall." Yes, it's a delicate balance, but it's also an opportunity to forge a more inclusive platform.
Your point about the complexities of implementing ranked-choice voting is valid and… Read more
