A Two-party Platform?

 

Call Me Mister In-Between

Well, I'm too old for girls and I'm too young for women
I've looked all around and my hopes are a-dimmin'
I feel like a fish not allowed any swimmin'
And it makes a fella mean
To feel he's a part of the Lost Generation
I feel like a choo-choo that can't find the station
I work like a dog with no recreation
They call me Mr. In-Between

Often being In-Between is a GOOD thing.

An election of a candidate to represent you in the group is about the candidate’s  policies AND character. By character, it is meant whether that candidate actually endorses those policies, rather than only pretending to endorse those policies in order to win the election. The fact that there are three outcomes to a contest while there are only two major parties, means that rank choice voting can NOT be used to indicate which of the candidates is your first, second and third choice. A voter may be faced with voting against a candidate rather than voting for a candidate. This will not advance a candidate whose policies are preferred by the voter, just that the charcater of the other candidate is so appalling that you will vote against your policies so as  to not vote for the other candidate.

When the major parties had two wings, this was not necessarily a problem. The winner of the party nomination probably had enough character that you could vote for his polices. Thus Main Street and Wall Street Republicans could exist in the same party. But if a major party will actively oppose having two factions and requires that all members think the same, then that party may nominate a candidate whose character is appalling to what would  have been those former members and voters, because they do not believe that their former party’s candidates character is such to advance their policies.

That there are two major parties is a consequences of Duverger’s Law. This says that in an election that is decided by dominance, i.e. >50% or even plurality and less than 50%, voters and candidates will eventually gravitate to two political parties. This can be changed if the two major parties each advance two candidates for election. Then there will be at a minimum four characters on each ballot. Then rank choice voting could be used even in a two-party system. Voters could then vote for a candidate and not against a candidate. Rank choice voting when there are only three candidates ensures that the winner will be acceptable to almost 67% of the voters. And 67% is a lot higher than 50%.

It is proposed that at each nominating convention of the major parties, there would be a nomination of a primary candidate and a secondary candidate. In the case of president, a slate of president and vice president. In states where elections are by rank choice voting, ( e.g. Alaska) both candidates would be on the ballot. In elections where rank choice voting is NOT used, then only the primary candidate shall be placed in the ballot.

As an example, if 10 people are asked to rank their three favorite restaurants and everyone picks a different first place restaurant and everyone picks a different third place restaurant, but everyone pick the same second place restaurant, then everyone’s second place restaurant IS the consensus favorite restaurant of the group. It was no individual's first choice, but it is everyone’s second choice restaurant, and thus probably the most acceptable restaurant to everyone of those 10 people in the group.