[EL] We missed an important point in Trump's fraud claims

[Thomas J. Cares]

Trump finds the possibility of Cruz misleading voters about a Carson
dropout to be egregious enough to justify voiding the vote. Of course
that's crazy, BUT INDEED the biggest factor determining who comes in first
in elections, very commonly, is 'who also ran' - we are so accustomed to
this grotesque whimsical distortion in our republic that we now have a
candidate shamelessly acting legally entitled to have his main
opponent's support fractured by an also-ran.

We *NEED* ranked choice/instant runoff voting. This is not acceptable
anymore. What kind of republic is this? I imagine a variation in history
where Nader falls in love with a young women in the late 90s who diverts
his interests from launching a futile presidential campaign, and then, of
course, Gore becomes president.

It's extremely perverse. If there is a newly-popular movement. There will
be enthusiasm behind it, and potentially lots of candidates aligned with
that movement. In plurality, these candidates will do each other in. The
movement will be denied the momentum its popularity called for.

As long as plurality voting chaotically distorts the republic against the
whimsical ambitions of the also-rans, WE DO NOT HAVE A SERIOUS REPUBLIC -
it is, in fact, incredibly degrading to the professions of this list's
members. While not a competition, it deserves *more* attention from the
so-called 'reform community' than campaign finance issues.

Thomas Cares



--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160204/37d7f688/attachment.html>