Run-Off Elections

[erpowers]

I now contend that all elections should have run-off elections. At least on two occasions in my lifetime people have been elected even though the vast majority of the people voted against that person. In 2003 Arnold Schwareggner was elected even though about 60% of the people voted against him. I am not sure the number is that high, but I know the majority of the people in California voted against him on his first run. This year Rick Perry of Texas was reelected even though about 66% the Texas voting population voted against him. So do other at DU think there should be run-off elections in all election races?

[queenbdem87]

1. Agreed

of course....we probably would have lost the Virginia Senate race if this was in place in the last election. Maybe even Montana.

[Dick Diver]

2. How would you extend that concept to presidential elections...

with the complicating factor of the electoral college (or would you)? For example, given a strict interpretation of your model, Bill Clinton would have had to face run-off elections twice, even though he won the electoral college. And I don't know how it could have been applied (logically) to Gore in 2000.

[erpowers]

3. Hard

That would be somewhat hard in that you cannot prevent the third party groups from running candidates. However, I think the worst thing about run-off elections in the presidential election would be the cost of conducting the second election. There could also be election fatigue.

I think you could just set a secondary date in case third party groups run in the election. Other than that propositional voting could be instituted in the presidential election. In that way people could list the people they want to vote for in terms of preference. I understand that could be complicated in that all those votes would have to be counted. Finally, the presidential election could just be exempt from the process.