COMMENTARY | Americans are fed up with the two party system, as neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are the least bit popular these days. Just look at a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll: President Barack Obama's approval rating is a scant 44 percent, yet he leads Republican frontrunners Mitt Romney and Herman Cain by six and 15 points respectively. And Congress, which is dominated by the two parties, has a record low approval of 9 percent.
With the major parties so unpopular, there is a growing interest in having a third-party candidate run for president. Indeed, a group called Americans Elect has made some headway at getting an alternative presidential candidate on the ballot in all states, and a panel of experts at the Institute of Politics believe a third-party candidate would have a better chance of winning than ever before. Although no prominent politician has announced running outside the major parties, current Republican contender Ron Paul is an oft-mentioned name.
Personally, I'd love to see a third party emerge in 2012. It's obvious by the polling data that Americans are largely dissatisfied with the quality of candidates in the two party system. And more importantly, the notion that everyone will find a president they like if only given two choices is absurd. There are usually more than two ways of looking at a issue, and there should be more than two legitimate options when it comes to choosing who will arguably become the most powerful person in the world.
Even so, I don't expect to see two-party dominance end anytime soon. While there have been isolated incidences of third-party success, the odds are just too stacked against them. For instance, it's difficult for candidates outside the major parties to raise money and get media attention.
However, the biggest challenge for third parties is the idea that voting for them will be a "wasted" vote. This is because candidates who aren't Republicans or Democrats rarely win, so voting for an alternative party often makes it feel like your vote doesn't matter.
The best way to address this flaw would be to install instant runoff voting. That voting system has you rank the candidates, which means you never have to worry about wasting a vote on an unpopular candidate. My home city of Minneapolis started using instant runoff voting in 2009, and this year it spread to neighboring St. Paul. Neither city struggled with the change, so there's no reason this system couldn't be expanded to presidential elections.
Of course, having a third option wouldn't automatically cure all the country's problems. And it could be argued that the two-party system has served us well for the most part, as it provides a stable form of government. Nevertheless, I think the voters are tired of having to choose among candidates perceived as mediocre at best, and it's time we get more - and hopefully superior - options.
apple keynote apple keynote seattle news seattle news cheryl burke jenna fischer ben bernanke
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.