Shot In The Dark: If I Could Cancel Them Again...

October 09, 2006

If I Could Cancel Them Again...

The Strib editorial board came out today in favor of of Instant Runoff voting - an idea which has some superficial attractions and some practical problems.

Of course, the Strib missed a few things:

2) Instant runoff voting will inspire candidates to appeal for those important second-choice votes. That should stifle at least some of the smear tactics Minnesota is seeing too often today.

The biggest smearer in Minnesota politics today is the Star-Tribune itself, which is, in effect, a DFL opposition research shop.

How will Instant Runoff fix that?

And their number one reason:

1) If kids can learn to paint by number, grownups can learn to vote by number.

The Strib's condescension is duly noted.

Here's a number the Strib should note: Number of Star/Tribunes in my house (excluding World Series memorial editions): 0.

Posted by Mitch at October 9, 2006 06:52 AM | TrackBack

Comments

I am really struggling to understand why instant runoff would reduce smear campaigns due to the need to appeal to second choice votes.

Instant runoff would certainly increase the viability of extremist parties at both ends of the political spectrum who, it seems to me, would be more likely to use smear tactics.

Patty Wetterling, for example, is using the Foley scandal to smear all Republicans. Her second choice votes as a Democrat would be extreme left voters. Would she stop using smear tactics because she fears loosing those votes? I don’t think so. What am I missing?

Posted by: Robert Brown at October 9, 2006 09:23 AM

I can not imagine a worse change to election law than IRV. If Flordia and Ohio have taught us anything, they should have at least taught us to not complicate, but simplify ballots.

Posted by: RickDFL at October 9, 2006 09:41 AM

The instant runoff should go on in the mind of the voter--not on the ballot. It just tends to multiply the number of minor parties hoping to win the runoff lottery someday.

Posted by: RBMN at October 9, 2006 12:06 PM

Mitch, you said, "The Strib's condescension is duly noted." but perhaps you missed the title to the editorial, "Top 10 reasons (most of them serious) to vote YES on the instant runoff voting charter question on the November ballot."

Posted by: Fulcum at October 9, 2006 01:23 PM

As I've posted, we should go the other way, eliminate all but the top two candidates in the Primary, regardless of affiliations. That could pair a DFL vs a Green for Mpls City Council, or Ellison vs Erlandson for the Congress. And if the IP and GOP get left out, so be it.

Third party (and they're not really parties) candidates only cause trouble in November.

Posted by: R-Five at October 9, 2006 09:41 PM