Super Tuesday Election 6/8 Discussion
- Thread starter RAMSTORIA
- Start date
Dead of Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
[quote name='IRHari']
Be interesting to see if people in CA think a failed CEO could make a wonderful Senator.[/QUOTE]
Cunt may win the primaries, but if she actually wins the general election, California deserves everything they're getting.
Be interesting to see if people in CA think a failed CEO could make a wonderful Senator.[/QUOTE]
Cunt may win the primaries, but if she actually wins the general election, California deserves everything they're getting.
Dead of Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']things dont look good out here. jerry brown 2.0 or (most likely) meg whitman.[/QUOTE]
Seriously if she wins, gtfo of there.
Seriously if she wins, gtfo of there.
cindersphere
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
If she wins, it is because of fresno. Worst place to live in Cali.
Magehart
CAGiversary!
I wanted Poizner because Jerry Brown is damn loony thinking he can fix the state by imposing taxes on everything that isn't green. He'll bankrupt us from the inside out. Whitman is a loose cannon with so much double talk we'll all be dizzy before the elections finally over.
It doesn't matter in the end though as the legislature and unions are the ones who run the state.
It doesn't matter in the end though as the legislature and unions are the ones who run the state.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
California is definitely the bow of the titanic.
cindersphere
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']california voted to kill 3rd parties last night. i have nothing to look forward to in november now. time to relocate.[/QUOTE]
Sadly, this is true.
Sadly, this is true.
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']california voted to kill 3rd parties last night. i have nothing to look forward to in november now. time to relocate.[/QUOTE]
Oddly enough, I'm not completely against this idea. Sorta.
I don't necessarily object to the idea of holding a general election, then holding a run off between the top vote earners - which is, somewhat, what's happened here. I'm not certain that the final field should be limited to the top two, though. Granted, if you opened it up to the top three, you'd probably end up with three Democrats or two Democrats and a Republican and third parties would be screwed again...
Although overly complicated, I'd like to see a points system.
Let's say there's 12 people on the ballot. Voter gets three votes. Vote #1 gives that candidate three points. #2 gives them two points and #3 gives them 1 point. Add up the points and you've got a winner.
I think this would allow more middle-ground candidates a real shot. While many people would vote for Extreme Candidate X as their #1, they'd be more likely to choose Middle-Ground Candidate Y as their 2nd or 3rd choice.
So, if 30% of the people vote for RX as their #1 and RMG as their #2, then R/D as their #3.
Another 30% of the people vote for DX as their #1 and DMG as their #2, then R/D as their #3
Next 20% vote R/D #1, RMG #2 and DMG #3.
Next 20% vote R/D #1, DMG #2 and RMG #3.
Your Republican eXtreme Candidate and Democratic eXtreme candidates just got 90 points each.
The Republican Middle Ground and Democratic Middle Ground guys pulled 120 points each.
The Half and Half Republican/Democratic candidate just pulled in 180 points.
Now, granted, this idea isn't perfect (and I just made those percentages up off the top of my head), but I think something like this would put more politicians in power that would be more middle ground candidates. But, as I said, it's way too complicated.
Oddly enough, I'm not completely against this idea. Sorta.
I don't necessarily object to the idea of holding a general election, then holding a run off between the top vote earners - which is, somewhat, what's happened here. I'm not certain that the final field should be limited to the top two, though. Granted, if you opened it up to the top three, you'd probably end up with three Democrats or two Democrats and a Republican and third parties would be screwed again...
Although overly complicated, I'd like to see a points system.
Let's say there's 12 people on the ballot. Voter gets three votes. Vote #1 gives that candidate three points. #2 gives them two points and #3 gives them 1 point. Add up the points and you've got a winner.
I think this would allow more middle-ground candidates a real shot. While many people would vote for Extreme Candidate X as their #1, they'd be more likely to choose Middle-Ground Candidate Y as their 2nd or 3rd choice.
So, if 30% of the people vote for RX as their #1 and RMG as their #2, then R/D as their #3.
Another 30% of the people vote for DX as their #1 and DMG as their #2, then R/D as their #3
Next 20% vote R/D #1, RMG #2 and DMG #3.
Next 20% vote R/D #1, DMG #2 and RMG #3.
Your Republican eXtreme Candidate and Democratic eXtreme candidates just got 90 points each.
The Republican Middle Ground and Democratic Middle Ground guys pulled 120 points each.
The Half and Half Republican/Democratic candidate just pulled in 180 points.
Now, granted, this idea isn't perfect (and I just made those percentages up off the top of my head), but I think something like this would put more politicians in power that would be more middle ground candidates. But, as I said, it's way too complicated.
bread's done