Replies

Your points are well taken. When an election is this close, it is very difficult, in fact, impossible, to come to a resolution that will satisfy both sides.

That's why - and I'm really cruisin' for a bruisin' now - that I like the way things are set up in Louisiana with their runoffs. If a candidate fails to achieve 50% of the vote, they have a run-off between the top two winners. In this case, Riley and Siegleman would have a run-off eliminating the Libertarian (and other third party candidates) and one of the candidates would be assured of getting 50% of the vote and a clear victory. In the Alabama case, there is virtually no doubt that Riley would win the runoff because most of those who voted Libertarian would come around to Riley.

I really like this system, I gotta tell you. Bill Clinton never received 50% of the vote either in 1992 or 1996. Imagine how things would have turned out in 1992 had there been a run-off between just Clinton and Bush with no Ross Perot (or anybody else). I just don't see Clinton winning in this situation.

Good point about the Clinton-Bush sans Perot runoff.

I like the way things are set up in Louisiana with their runoffs. If a candidate fails to achieve 50% of the vote, they have a run-off between the top two winners...I really like this system, I gotta tell you. Bill Clinton never received 50% of the vote either in 1992 or 1996. Imagine how things would have turned out in 1992 had there been a run-off between just Clinton and Bush with no Ross Perot (or anybody else). I just don't see Clinton winning in this situation.

Under this system, Al Gore might have taken FL in 2000 because there was a Green candidate who had more votes than the margin of victory...then again there was Buchanan. Anyway, the 3rd party thing can cut both ways.

That's why - and I'm really cruisin' for a bruisin' now - that I like the way things are set up in Louisiana with their runoffs. If a candidate fails to achieve 50% of the vote, they have a run-off between the top two winners. In this case, Riley and Siegleman would have a run-off eliminating the Libertarian (and other third party candidates) and one of the candidates would be assured of getting 50% of the vote and a clear victory. In the Alabama case, there is virtually no doubt that Riley would win the runoff because most of those who voted Libertarian would come around to Riley.

I'll respectfully disagree. Having worked as a Republican poll watcher in Alabama, I can say without reservation that a runoff election would only give bugsy an opportunity to rig the results. It is ridiculously easy to do given the fact that we Republicans have been unable to get a law passed that requires a voter to provide a photo ID when he arrives at the polls. I could arrive at any poll, take a quick peek at the voter registration printout, pick a name that isn't highlighted, and claim to be that person. Unless the registration clerk personally knows the individual whose identity I have just claimed, I am home free. I have seen this happen more than once.