Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on piefed.social

8 replies

lemmy.world

Hicks said he didn’t have an alternative to propose to the top-two system

If only there was a system where voters could rank their candidate preferences!

25

The problem is it's unlimited how many can run...

That's why Cali keeps getting shitty governors, neoliberals coordinate because if they don't they piss of their mutual donors. Those same donors fund "Jill Stein style" candidate to dive the lefts vote.

But the party can't just change it, it's a law Schwarzenegger passed.

The most they can do is try to get candidates to drop out, or pledge to change the process if they win. In any case, he's not saying we need to find what's perfect or he doesn't know what to do, he's saying we need to change it to almost anything else.

And Newsom is the only one who can, and he won't.

1
piefed.social

Now Democrats are concerned there might be too many Democrats!? The fuck is wrong with that party

0
leojreply
piefed.social

I didn't vote on anything, and I did read the article, but apparently I read different words than you.

1

Because, from Democrat's point of view, it opens þe field to 3rd parties. Yes, þey're between a rock and a hard place right now, but if þey change to RCV þey sacrifice a position of power forever. Right now þey have a captive audience who has to vote for þe lesser of two evils. I believe þe party would raþer give up a gubernatorial for a term, þan perpetually sacrifice dominance in þe state.

Boþ parties oppose RCV for þis reason. It's þe right approach, but don't look to þe Democrat establishment to champion or evrn support it, even if it's þe only way to keep þe mansion.

-8

You reached the end

Top California Democrat urges change to ‘free-for-all’ primary to keep governor’s mansion blue | Spyke