My congressman (allegedly a Democrat) voted for the shutdown. I did not support him in the last primary, and I won't support him in the next, but his opponent was pure teabagger. I would vote for him again in the general election.
And here we have why first-past-the-post is a terrible voting method.
Recently, in a local city council race, my friends district was won by an individual who got 30% of the vote. It was a 5 person race. Three of the four other candidates were all ideologically opposed to the winner, and many supporters said "Hey, so long as X doesn't win...." but the split vote gave the win to someone who more than 50% did not want.
The 5th candidate, who was ideologically in line with the winner? She came in 5th place, pulling a tiny portion of the vote; even if you add her votes to the winners, the three other candidates had more votes. Alas, winner takes all, it'd be nice to change, but I don't see it happening. =(
In that case, it is a perfect illustration of what happens when there isn't enough participation in primaries. Typically only 25% or less vote in them, and those are the hardcore party faithful who are less likely to vote to shake up the status quo.
This was a democratic primary. The voters chose someone who is essentially a republican. He had lots of money, and name recognition from family members who hold/held/were running for, local office too.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 02:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 03:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 03:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 06:00 pm (UTC)Recently, in a local city council race, my friends district was won by an individual who got 30% of the vote. It was a 5 person race. Three of the four other candidates were all ideologically opposed to the winner, and many supporters said "Hey, so long as X doesn't win...." but the split vote gave the win to someone who more than 50% did not want.
The 5th candidate, who was ideologically in line with the winner? She came in 5th place, pulling a tiny portion of the vote; even if you add her votes to the winners, the three other candidates had more votes. Alas, winner takes all, it'd be nice to change, but I don't see it happening. =(
no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 06:15 pm (UTC)a great illustration of the problem with non-partisan elections or:
a great illustration of why voting third party is self-defeating.
In my district, if all the idiotic Green Party voters had voted instead in the Democratic primary, we could have had a much better candidate.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 06:25 pm (UTC)The winner, (and the 5th place woman) were essentially republicans, and even thought about running for the seat *as* republicans.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-01 07:25 pm (UTC)This was a democratic primary. The voters chose someone who is essentially a republican.
He had lots of money, and name recognition from family members who hold/held/were running for, local office too.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-03 07:20 am (UTC)