Skip to content
Subscribe

Top 2 or Not Top 2?

Top 2 or Not Top 2?
Published:

Florida Independent Voting.Org’s (FIV) BLOG on Florida legislation benefited greatly from the civil, thoughtful and well-reasoned comments and responses to each other.  It’s a joy to read comments from people with a brain that can express themselves with logic rather than anger and rote ideologies.  Thanks very much!  When the FIV movement began, we all had reservations and ideas to “make it better”.  The following comments are offered as additional food for thought.  Let’s keep the dialogue going!

Grassroots Campaigns: A true grassroots campaign, according to what I’m told, is almost always short on money and probably name recognition as well.  A grassroots candidate can make up for not being a major party candidate by efficient use of time and hard work of a volunteer base.  The grassroots candidate needs the time before AND after a primary to become known and viable in the general election.  Typically a primary is followed by the general election in two-three months.  Florida has its primary in August giving the underdog candidate less than three months to make his/her case.  If the candidate only surfaces between primary and general elections, the advantage goes to the well-financed better-known candidate.

Survival: Michael Higham raises two very helpful points.  First, Top 2 isn’t about independent candidates.  It is about finding the best candidate regardless of party affiliation or no party affiliation.  One premise of Top 2 is that all candidates will need to appeal to a much broader base and, therefore, not represent the usual extremes of one party or another.  Second, surviving a Top 2 primary makes the underdog more competitive in a one-on-one race.  One of the strategies in Texas No Limit Poker is to eliminate the competition early in a hand and only have to deal with one opponent.  Not a bad strategy for a candidate for office?

Money! Money! Money!  We need campaign finance reform, period! The IRS did a very dumb thing in targeting conservative 501c4 organizations but the underlying motive may have been pure.  A 501c4 can’t devote more than half its time in political activism and be legal.  It does matter whether what the IRS did was legal or not despite the incredibly dumb comment by Dan Pfeiffer, President Obama’s spin doctor.  What matter much, much more is having the guts to change the system from inside!  The Catch 22 we face is that the current US Congressional and Florida Legislative incumbents will never allow meaningful campaign finance reform.  We need to elect individuals that aren’t owned by corporations or wealthy individuals.

Build The Government Voters Deserve: A group named Represent Us  http://represent.us/ is pursuing legislation titled “The American Anti-Corruption Act”.  Trevor Potter (Former FEC Commissioner and Steven Colbert Super PAC lawyer) is one of the authors of the legislation.  A group named Move To Amend https://movetoamend.org/ is pursuing a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.  Top 2 is a building block to complement these movements.  We need to build a better government brick-by-brick.

More Candidates:  Regarding Top 3 or 4, FIV simply wanted to stay within the construct of Washington and California Top 2 laws to hopefully reduce or eliminate future court challenges.  Some would argue for instant runoff as well.  If one assumes a close race to be <6% difference between the second and third place candidates in a Primary Election, Washington State only had 7% of the total 400 races (US Congressional and State/Senate/Representatives) spanning 2008 – 2012 that were close.

Kevin, your point about voter turnout is certainly valid regarding Top 2 and candidate selection.  FIV believes Top 2 requires a culture change which means time must pass.  We are working on a set of metrics based on Washington States Top 2 election history from 2008 through 2012.  The bottom line to voter apathy is grassroots organizing and large doses of perseverance.  One of the often cited reasons for not voting in a primary is that there is no real differentiation between candidates.  We are early in the life of Top 2.  We need to give it some time.  Higher quality candidates can boost turnout.   See below for a peak at Florida compared to California and Washington State turnout.  Turnout is a problem that we collectively need to address.

The BLOG comments provided by IVN members highlight the difficulties of finding that perfect solution to election system reform.  FIV encourages every Floridian to spread the word and seek support for a constitutional amendment to make our election system something to be proud of.

voter-trunout

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Top 2 or Not Top 2?

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us