LZ Granderson has this column on CNN, extolling the virtues of having at least three viable presidential candidates in general elections. Granderson is a columnist both for CNN and for ESPN, and generally writes about sports.
This particular column focuses mostly on Jon Huntsman as a potential “third force” candidate, but the column is at least equally noteworthy for what it says about the general benefits of additional choice beyond the major party nominees, whether the outsider candidate has a chance of winning or not.
How many folks want a 40 percent Prez winner ???
See 1860.
Some of our best presidents have been elected with a plurality only, and some of our worst presidents have won in landslides.
#1
I’ll take a 40% winner over a 100% loser. Wink, wink.
# 2 Be careful of the *our* stuff — i.e. use *the*.
Is best/worst stuff in the mind of the beholder ???
What percentage of the voters who change their minds about a best/worst Prez who they voted for is the question —
i.e. the old *What have I (repeat I) done ???* stuff — see the ending of the Bridge on the River Kwai movie circa 1958.
i.e. —
vote for Clinton in 1996 – vote for Bush II in 2000
vote for Bush II in 2004 – vote for Obama in 2008
etc.
U.S.A. 1928 R 58 – D 42
U.S.A. 1932 D 58 – R 42
A major change in so-called thinking ???
—–
What percentage of the surviving Germans in May 1945 had second thoughts about voting for the nazis in 1932 (and getting the Hitler tyrant regime in 1933-1945) ???
—–
NONPARTISAN approval voting exec/judic and RECALLS.
1,000 signatures per Congressional District to gain ballot access for all parties. Ballot access is kept if a candidate gets say 30,000 votes or 1% of the vote.