I guess this is what you do if there are only two candidates running and they are "100% Hitler’ and “99% Hitler”. Fortunately, I’ve never encountered this situation, but I’d really be in a moral dilemma if I did.
We should have a “None of the above” option on the ballot. If “None of the above” got the most votes, then they’d have to run another election with all new candidates.
There are a number of election system models better than the ones used in United States elections. Sadly, our elected officials get more power with the system as it is, and it’s difficult to organize general strikes around election reform…or court reform for that matter. And I say that since the US Supreme Court has succeeded in vetoing the VRA and is carving into the 14th and 15th amendments.
I guess this is what you do if there are only two candidates running and they are "100% Hitler’ and “99% Hitler”. Fortunately, I’ve never encountered this situation, but I’d really be in a moral dilemma if I did.
We should have a “None of the above” option on the ballot. If “None of the above” got the most votes, then they’d have to run another election with all new candidates.
Better do of the other acceptably functional democratic models that don’t result in a 2 party system. Proportional representation, instant-runoff, …
There are a number of election system models better than the ones used in United States elections. Sadly, our elected officials get more power with the system as it is, and it’s difficult to organize general strikes around election reform…or court reform for that matter. And I say that since the US Supreme Court has succeeded in vetoing the VRA and is carving into the 14th and 15th amendments.
We would still have centrists going “I am looking for a 99.6% Hitler.”
Tiered voting!!!