Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
> > Doug Freyburger wrote:
> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >> > Doug Freyburger wrote:
> >
> >> >> Green and Libertarian parties are in place and ready to go ...
> >
> >> > I don't see how any additional parties can become viable under the
> >> > current voting structure ...
> >
> >> Here's where I think the key issue is - I don't see how any additional
> >> parties can become viable under the current *media* structure ...
> >
> > How do you explain all the media attention that Ross Perrot got? Or who
> > was it the last couple cycles, Ron Paul? How about Ralph Nader?
>
> Perrot and Nader were one-shot candidates. Perrot's Reform Party
> languished quickly. Paul has passed in and out of the Libertarian Party
> and is currently a Republican. He gets much less media attention than
> his fund raising and popularity would suggest and the media consistantly
> depicts him as unwinable.
>
> > The media isn't the problem, it's the voting structure that produces too
> > much risk of getting the candidate you hate the most if you place your
> > vote on the long shot candidate.
>
> This is another feature of the current two party system. A vote for
> someone outside the two parties, by someone who regularly votes for one
> of those two parties, is a loss to that party. It increases the chances
> of the opposition winning. I address that issue by not being a part of
> either party in the first place. I'm already lost to both.
>
> I take the view that I know I'm voting for a candidate who will lose,
> but to me it's more about voting for my principles than it is about
> voting for a loser. Expressing my principles through my votes is more
> important to me than dropping my principles to vote for a candidate I
> don't want to win.
>
> I also take the Ron Paul lesson to heart. His Libertarian supporters
> get more influence that Republican members. I think of it as a lever.
> On the inside I have less leverage. On the outside I have more. No
> matter that my own opinions are much more centrist than more members of
> my party I do it for the increased leverage. If the end result of my
> votes is added pressure towards libertarian principles by either of the
> two big parties then my vote wasn't wasted. It's a calculated approach.

Calculated, but still problematic. Simply giving people a 1st and 2nd
choice would eliminate most of the problem and allow people to take the
long shot without the risk of getting the worst of the more likely
"winners".