So, I guess that there is high drama going on with the Minnesota recount process. And I don’t find that to be particularly surprising, since it’s a very close vote count and there are careers as well as ideological power issues at stake.
But one of the things that troubles me about the Minnesota Senate race is that about 15% of the population voted for a third party candidate! 15%! I know Minnesotans also elected an independent governor once and from what I’ve seen of him on television, he’s not incredibly bright, but this high count of independent votes, especially when polling makes it clear that the independent candidate has practically no chance of winning, is rather disturbing to me.
Now, this is really the same impulse that made me post “Nader Voters” a week ago, so perhaps I just am slow at grasping things, but it seems to me that a large number of Minnesotans have not received an adequate civic education if they think that fostering third parties in a plurality voting system is a good idea…either that or they don’t care for majoritarian democracy, which I suppose is a somewhat defensible view…if your part of a group that gains from subverting it (hint: it’s usually not the third parties that do).
So, I guess the point of this post is to ask the same question to Barkley voters as I did to Nader voters (I only got one response which was along the lines of “I don’t like the major party candidates”, which IMO is weak): Why did you vote for Barkley? And why didn’t you spend your time campaigning against plurality voting instead?