![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
May. 6th, 2010 11:46 amI envy this chance the British have to at least threaten Labour with the prospect of another (by American standards) liberal party, thus avoiding both Kennedy/Daley Complex and Scott Brown Syndrome. Our primary system is becoming a joke. You need to be able to throw the bastards out without throwing worse bastards in.
I wonder if anti-votes might take care of that? Suppose you got to vote one person up and one other person down--most people would just downvote the rival ticket, sure, but if there more than two candidates it might let relatively unhated alternatives in. Or perhaps a point system would be best. Say you get ten, and you get to apply them either positively or negatively. That would have solved the fuck out of the Bush problem, minimally, though it might given us Nader; though I suppose it might also kick Obama out, if a new presidential election happened today.
Getting to vote people down would also make voting infinitely more appealing, increasing both turnout and attention to candidates, both of which aid Democrats and democracy.
I wonder if anti-votes might take care of that? Suppose you got to vote one person up and one other person down--most people would just downvote the rival ticket, sure, but if there more than two candidates it might let relatively unhated alternatives in. Or perhaps a point system would be best. Say you get ten, and you get to apply them either positively or negatively. That would have solved the fuck out of the Bush problem, minimally, though it might given us Nader; though I suppose it might also kick Obama out, if a new presidential election happened today.
Getting to vote people down would also make voting infinitely more appealing, increasing both turnout and attention to candidates, both of which aid Democrats and democracy.
