Election adjustment

One of the largest problems we have in American politics is how we go about electing representatives into office. Once upon a time, plurality probably seemed like a good idea, because it was better than what everybody else was using at the time.

Unfortunately, it's turned out to be one of the worst methods of electing somebody that anybody could devise. By running a party primary followed by a plurality election, we eliminate the possibility of individuals voting for their most preferred candidate, in case their second or third preference is beaten by somebody they like even less. And that completely avoids the issue of voter participation because most of the candidates are eliminated long before the electorate has a chance to vote on them or learn about their qualifications.

A well run system should allow any number of candidates to be in the final election, in order to encourage the maximum number of individuals to vote in hopes that their top candidate will have a chance at winning the election and forcing candidates to further differentiate themselves from more candidates instead of pounding on one opponent and his the other half of the electorate who he agrees more with.

To select a wide selection of candidates for this final election, every voter should have the chance to select any candidate for the final election without inhibiting their preferred choice. A good way to do this would be for open primaries, where every voter votes yes for as many candidates to be on the final ballot as they want. Any candidates above a certain threshold (3%, 5%, 10%, ect.), no more than three per party, and between 5-20 candidates would be selected for the final election. This ensures a better quality of choices for all of the electorate, and if one candidate proves to be inferior, the one opposing candidate doesn't win by default.

Once the final field is selected, and an appropriate amount of time has been given for campaigning, the final election would be held. Every voter would then rank all of the final candidates in order of preference. Ranked voting has the advantage of allowing your votes to be counted for 2nd, 3rd, or even lower ranked candidates if your first choices are eliminated by poor performance. At least you then have the opportunity to vote for your most preferred option and still vote for your second option if the first is truly unwanted, and just not voted for based on the the perception that he is unelectable as so often happens with our current system.