Slashdot Mirror
Ask Green Party Presidential Candidate David Cobb
Today you have the opportunity to ask questions of the
Green Party's candidate for President of the United States,
David Cobb. Standard interview rules apply: we'll select a dozen or so of the best questions and Mr. Cobb will give us his answers next week.
I believe he's already on record as saying if you're in a swing state, vote Kerry. Because, even though he's not much better on some issues, Bush is a disaster. Heard this on NPR following Nader's failed bid to get on as the Green candidate
No, technically he was elected.
The Florida Supreme Court tried to apply alternate vote-counting rules not allowed under Florida law to ballots in specific counties. This was overturned on a 7-2 decision of the US Supreme Court. The FSC also tried to extend the date of certification when the certification date also was clearly stated under Florida law. This is the vote that was overturned on a 5-4 decision. The USSC basically said that the election results as then-currently counted under Florida law had to stay put, because the FSC was trying to rewrite election law on its own, which is not its role in the system.
And to correct your other point, the limit is ten years in office, which usually translates to two elected terms as president with some overlap in case the VP is moved up a notch. So no, even if you were right, he wouldn't be able to run twice more.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Actually, the myth that a 3rd party vote is wasted needs to be dispelled. Reaching a certain percentage of voters for an office means that that party will be automatically carried to the ballot on the next election. From the top of my head, the percentage required varies from office to office (and possibly state to state), but 5% of the vote for the presidency gets your party relisted and access to receive public funding for the next election (see here).
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
He supports instant runoff voting. I prefer approval voting myself, since it's a bit simpler, but almost anything would be better than plurality voting.
-jim
The electoral college is not, technically, the cause of the winner-take-all system. That's a decision by the individual state governments on how to allocate their electors. Maine and Nebraska split their electors by district, so they're not (as) winner take all.
/. Q&A) because of this last reason (reducing the sway of large urban populations.)
Were every state government to do a parliamentary-esque division of their electors to each party by % of popular vote, the electoral college system could remain in place, and you'd ahve viable third party candidates. In fact, they'd have the power to give their votes to one major party or the other if there was no clear majority. Which would put the selection of president even farther away from the popular vote, and even more contingent on the decisions of select party leadership, but eh, whatcha gonna do?
What the electoral college does do is allow for the possibility of a president who didn't win the popular vote, weigh the election in favor of the eastern seaboard's tiny states, and gaurantee that candidates have to campaign in every state, rather than focusing (as much) on the major population centers.
Badnarik, the libertarian candidate, supports the electoral college system (look up his recent