DP
JoB said:
in a winner takes all election system..
electing the lesser of two evils is often the difference between war and peace, financial solvency and bankruptcy, a functional social safety net and bankrupt services, a roof over your head and being homeless, food on the table and an empty belly.. or living or dieing when catastrophic illness hits…
Well said, my friend. Maybe you’re right. But ask yourself this: Why do we have homelessness in this country in the first place? Is it because we elect Republican presidents every 8 years?
—If that were true, then how to explain homelessness that persists between Republican regimes?
The same goes for the other social ills you mentioned. I think these things go beyond the question of who’s in office at any given time. I think they go all the way to the question of how we function as a society. But that’s really a question for another post . . . or maybe several.
What I’m trying to say here, in this piece, is that our current system has a way of squeezing large groups of people (like third-party voters) out of the democratic process. If we can get those people back into the process somehow, then we’ll all be better off, don’t you agree?
Someone will be following this up with an article on IRV (Instant Runoff Voting) soon. That article will discuss ways to make the voting process more inclusive and more meaningful at the same time.
I look forward to a time when ALL Americans want to be involved in politics at several levels. That, in my opinion, is the best way to tackle homelessness, health care reform, and the rest.
Campaign finance reform is one step forward along that road, JoB.
Voting reform is another.
—David