patrick.net

You could vote independent. Or green.

We got this way because we are afraid to vote for a thing we think will loose, thinking that it's wasting the vote, so we vote for the least worst option. And the votes are totally channeled in this direction by the options we're given.

My favorite example is from the Bush v Kerry race, if you remember that one, there was a huge anti-war movement going on in the states at the time, and Bush was being slammed by the left as the incarnation of a demon and Kerry was presented as the only viable alternative to bush, really, and so this huge anti-war movement was channeled into supporting Kerry, who was a pro-war candidate.

Any anti-war voter who really cared deeply about that issue should by rights have voted for Nader in that election, the only candidate who was anti-war. But they don't because of the way the system is set up and channels our votes to one or the other of the two "legitimate" candidates.

I say find a candidate who supports what you want and vote for what You want and make then work for that vote, don't let your vote get channeled and taken for granted.

Some countries have dozens of candidates with varied positions and instant run off elections that result in power sharing governments that seem to work quite well.

You can't ask a question like that unless you're willing to consider the alternatives.