Puck Article Says Top-Five Supporters Hope to Raise $100,000,000 to Push Their Plan

This article in Puck says that backers of top-five systems hope to raise $100,000,000 soon to promote top-five systems. These systems deprive political parties of their ability to nominate candidates. No other country in the world has an election system in which party labels are on the ballot, but parties can’t nominate candidates. The article mentions these wealthy individuals and families as supporters: Reid Hoffman and the John Sobrato family, the billionaire real estate dynasty; Charles Munger, who backed top-two in California; Sol Lieberman; Katherine Gehl; Aaron Menenberg; Raj Kapoor; the Arillaga family; Kathryn Murdoch; and Andrew Yang.

The article quotes political scientist Jack Santucci as saying that the plan won’t achieve its objectives. In order to read the article, which is free, the reader must submit an e-mail address. Thanks to Fairvote for the link.


Comments

Puck Article Says Top-Five Supporters Hope to Raise $100,000,000 to Push Their Plan — 12 Comments

  1. NOOOO extremist primaries.
    NOOOO gerrymanders.

    Equal nom pets – ALL candidates
    PR
    APPV
    TOTSOP

  2. I could live with a Top 5 if they used an instant run-off method to narrow down to 5 and then again in the general election between the 5.

  3. Quotas are a fascist tool for control. Voters don’t deserve more than five choices and one only would be best.

  4. Marshall, none of these proposals include ranked choice in the primary. They only use ranked choice in the general election. The proponents never explain why they even need a primary. If parties aren’t going to have nominees, there is no reason not to just abolish the primary and have a ranked choice election in November.

  5. Parties, large and small, have associational and proprietery rights in their own names and labels. They ought to have the right to withhold them from any candidate.

  6. @ RW:

    Excellent point. If you have ranked choice voting in the final election, why even have a primary?

  7. If you are going to use RCV in the final election, then any primary ought to use approval voting to determine which candidates the voters would prefer to see in the final election. A certain number of approval votes could determine who proceeds to the final. Since voters could use any number of approval votes, each voter could pick ALL the candidates that voter would like to see in the final election. They would determine by their very votes the number of finalists.

  8. All way too complicated. I’m not a big fan of change, or demon crazy for that matter. Mr. TRUMP and the military are more than capable of making political decisions and appointing whoever needs to be appointed to oversee whatever needs to be overseen.

  9. Top 80%. Permit majority election in the Open Primary.

    Otherwise determine top candidates who collectively receive 80% of the vote. The last qualified candidate sets a threshold. Additional candidates may qualify by coalescing their support. Qualified candidates other than Top 2 may withdraw.

    Repeat the process for as many trials as necessary, except at least one candidate eliminated in each round. Write-ins would be permitted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.