Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

(64,155 posts)

6. Would need to limit the number of candidates, which is probably unconstitutional.

Wed Nov 4, 2020, 10:54 PM

Nov 2020

Could do jungle primary, all on same ballot, top two go to general. Not a fan of that, either, but it makes the final step a binary choice.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What is a feasible way to move away from plurality voting? [View all] theaocp Nov 2020 OP

Why is it toxic? nt Codeine Nov 2020 #1

Plurality voting (i.e. "first past the post") means... regnaD kciN Nov 2020 #9

It's a real problem Alpeduez21 Nov 2020 #3

Ranked choice voting IS plurality voting, almost by definition. Ms. Toad Nov 2020 #5

With two parties there's a natural inclination to divide down the middle LiberalLovinLug Nov 2020 #7

We don't need to change existing law every marybourg Nov 2020 #8