(I've figured out how to quote since my last comment on that. I have no idea why quoting a message is merely an option...)
----- Mail original ----- (Richard wrote) > Unfortunately none of the third parties in the U.S. are understanding this > opportunity. The "leaders" at the top of those third parties are more > concerned about maintaining their control than representing frustrated voters. I don't think that any parties so at odds with the Democrats or Republicans that they can't run under those labels, are the parties we are looking for. I think that if, under whatever rules were in place, there were room for three contenders in an election, you would find not-too-unfamiliar-looking candidates taking the third spot and trying to beat the Ds and Rs. With this situation, it is at least possible that a general viewpoint (about as coherent as those of the Ds and Rs) would come together and allow a third "party" including a label for it. It isn't obvious that a three-way race will still fight over the center though. I am interested to study this, but it seems very hard to study voter strategy and nomination strategy at the same time. If party discipline were strengthened (though I can't imagine how that would happen) I expect it would force some current Ds and Rs to leave and form new minor parties. But I don't think this in itself would benefit voters much. I think it would mean for many that there is even less of a real choice. Kevin ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
