|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listners of la Invasora 1400 political talk show Cara a Cara have often contacted us expressing similar frustrations: “By the time we pay attention to the gubernatorial race, all the candidates have been decided for us”. “ We’re sick of all the negative advertising”. “How is it that we could be getting another anti-immigrant governor, when most Minnesotans are not anti-immigrant”. “Is it even worth it voting when it seems we don’t have enough of a say in elections?” Well there may be a solution to this problem.
In the run-up to this year’s gubernatorial election, a lot has been written about the improvements that Ranked Choice Voting – also known as Instant Runoff Voting – could bring to our broken electoral system. For one, we could move away from plurality winners: Minnesotans are once again facing the likelihood of a seven-way race that will be “won” by someone garnering less than 50 percent of the vote. It’s entirely possible that that someone could be a candidate who’s climbed the political ladder in part by exploiting ugly wedge issues . . . a candidate who has called Arizona’s draconian immigration law “a wonderful first step.” Under the status quo, a candidate who’s actually opposed by most voters can win. We did get a governor after all in the past election who received less than 50% of the vote and who now says that US citizens who were born from undocumented immigrants should have their citizenship striped away.
And much has been made about the potential for RCV to curb stridency and negativity in campaigning. It removes the incentive for candidates to attack each other: In a system where there’s a clear benefit to being a voter’s second choice, candidates focus on their own ideas, positions
...
|
rss
