Emmer concedes

[fotog54]

My point is no elected official can make any claim to having the support of the people if he did not win the election with a majority of the vote! He limped into the position of governor due to poorly designed election system which places cost of election above the will of the electorate.

In a head to head battle I believe Mark Dayton would have lost.

So now Minnesota has 2 socialist senators and 1 not well adjusted governor!

Good Grief!!

Using that logic, Pawlenty would have lost in 2002 and 2006.

There is nothing wrong with using a plurality instead of a majority. If you're going to let people vote for who they want, you can't limit who they can vote for.

You don't know that Pawlenty would have lost in a head to head vote.. you can believe it might have been a different outcome, but I won't argue about what you choose to believe.

And yes I do believe in a run-off election you can and should limit the choices between the top 2 vote getters of the general election.

Having an election decided by a plurality instead of a majority will allow a planted 3rd party candidate to pull votes and essentially allow a stealing of the election, and yes I believe that is what occurred here.

[Heffay]

And yes I do believe in a run-off election you can and should limit the choices between the top 2 vote getters of the general election.

That will discourage voting. We have a time-honored tradition in America that you can vote for whoever you want. If you are limited to just 2 authorized choices, then your vote doesn't count if you don't like either of them. Heck, if you insist on making a majority, you couldn't even have a "none of the above" category, because that would create the opportunity for noone to ever win. That's not what we stand for.

Edit:

You don't know that Pawlenty would have lost in a head to head vote.. you can believe it might have been a different outcome, but I won't argue about what you choose to believe.

The 3rd party candidates in 2002 and 2006 were very liberal. The democratic candidates complained about the same thing back then: That the Independence party was siphoning votes off from them. And the republicans during that race kept on saying "hey, if you want a majority vote, change the rules to support that.

[ex-LT]

What is really pathetic is Minnesota gets stuck with a governor the majority of people did not for!

I don't really have a problem with this. 3 parties > 2 parties. In our current system, that's the way it's gonna work.

But it's a good argument for IRV!

NOTHING is a good argument for instant runoff voting.

+1

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Ranked-choice voting is a disaster waiting to happen. The rejected ballots from the 2008 election all but proved that. The vast majority of those ballots were rejected because they were improperly marked. Now the IRV proponents want to add ANOTHER layer of confusion to mix? All that will accomplish is to further befuddle the people who couldn't properly mark a ballot in the first place.

IMNSHO, the only thing IRV will accomplish is the guarantee that EVERY election will result in a recount.

[autobahn]

My point is no elected official can make any claim to having the support of the people if he did not win the election with a majority of the vote! He limped into the position of governor due to poorly designed election system which places cost of election above the will of the electorate.

In a head to head battle I believe Mark Dayton would have lost.

So now Minnesota has 2 socialist senators and 1 not well adjusted governor!

Good Grief!!

So, what you're saying is, you're angry that a third party candidate was allowed to run?

[Heffay]

So, what you're saying is, you're angry that a third party candidate was allowed to run?

Blaming the third party candidate is like blaming me for Emmer's loss. It's not my fault he sucks. Next time maybe he should try to be... I dunno.. more not completely odious?

[rtk]

Emmer concedes by ahrens on Wed Dec 08, 2010 11:56 am

It's over, you are going to cause blisters on your dominate palm.

[fotog54]

My point is no elected official can make any claim to having the support of the people if he did not win the election with a majority of the vote! He limped into the position of governor due to poorly designed election system which places cost of election above the will of the electorate.

In a head to head battle I believe Mark Dayton would have lost.

So now Minnesota has 2 socialist senators and 1 not well adjusted governor!

Good Grief!!

So, what you're saying is, you're angry that a third party candidate was allowed to run?

No, I'm angry that the will of the Majority will never be known.... actually, I will restate my original point....

The majority of people who voted in the General Election did not vote for Mark Dayton!

Then we ended up with him anyway. I find something fundamentally wrong with that on many levels.

There used to be a time when the only way to win an election was 50% plus 1. There were run-off elections of the top 2. I'm willing to live with and accept such a system... this is just nuts!

I admit I think Emmer was a weak candidate in many ways. But Mark Dayton was the worst Senator in history and has an addictive personality and is just plain looney! IMHO

[Heffay]

No, I'm angry that the will of the Majority will never be known.... actually, I will restate my original point....

The majority of people who voted in the General Election did not vote for Mark Dayton!

Then we ended up with him anyway. I find something fundamentally wrong with that on many levels.

There used to be a time when the only way to win an election was 50% plus 1. There were run-off elections of the top 2. I'm willing to live with and accept such a system... this is just nuts!

I admit I think Emmer was a weak candidate in many ways. But Mark Dayton was the worst Senator in history and has an addictive personality and is just plain looney! IMHO

If you want the elections to be decided by a majority instead of a plurality, all you have to do is get the state Constitution changed to support your wishes. Until then, elections will continue to be decided by the same way they've been decided here for the last 150 years or so.

Wait... was there a time in Minnesota where we had elections by majority instead of plurality?

[fotog54]

I am from Georgia and have lived here 8 years, GA has a run off elections to get a majority.

For some more information on plurality v. majority I found this article on the net!


http://www.fairvote.org/reasons-to-reconsider-plurality-voting/


I could not find any information if it has always been this way in MN.