If elected President, which of these Democrats...

[cascadiance]

131. But focusing on him to blame makes it harder to fix the system properly...

... because make no mistake about it, this is a systemic problem.

When you had Katherine Harris with Jeb Bush who were consciously trying to break it by throwing out tons of voters votes through their vote matching schemes with Texas firms, etc. THEY were trying to manipulate the election to subvert Democracy.

Nader wasn't trying to subvert the process. He was trying to have other voices being heard that were being lost in an electoral process that is increasingly making it harder for other voices to be heard and measured. That is why I continue to advocate instant runoff voting as the thing we should all be ranting FOR, and not continuing to rant AGAINST someone like Nader as the reason for the problems with that election. We will never fix the system to work for us if we only just focus on blaming Nader, who we forget has done so much for our country in terms of the regulatory efforts he put in place to protect many people's lives from the auto industry not paying attention to safety standards, etc.

Now, I have said and will continue to say that in today's environment, that third parties would be better served by uniting and becoming "single issue candidates". Not so much that they only talk about a single issue, but that one single issue would govern whether they continue to run and who they might endorse in a general election. And that would be instant runoff voting. If a third party sees that another candidate in the race helps influence and leads his party in that locale to put in place instant runoff voting, that they would pull out and endorse that candidate to win the election. That way, even if that candidate isn't addressing all of that party's concerns that election, they would have in the future a better system to run a campaign and not hurt the third parties or the better of the two major party candidates running as well.