“But the defect that prevents independent presidential candidates West and De la Cruz from appearing on Georgia’s ballot does not pertain to the number of signatures acquired; it is that West’s electors and De la Cruz’s electors filed no nomination petitions at all,” Justice Sarah Warren wrote.
There’s a process for ballot access, which includes the candidate’s electors filing paperwork. They didn’t. Counting votes for these two candidates’ would be allowing ballot access to a candidate who didn’t meet the prerequisites. This court ruling appears appropriate, based on information I have at hand.
So, what changed?
Support !rcv@ponder.cat if you want an alternative to the duopoly. It’s on the ballot in a lot of places coming up.
If you’re not doing that, but you are choosing to vote for a spoiler candidate, you can anticipate a whole lot more duopoly in the future.
Without RCV I can’t take other parties seriously. I’m not throwing my vote away.
RCV would be great, most definitely. However:
There’s a process for ballot access, which includes the candidate’s electors filing paperwork. They didn’t. Counting votes for these two candidates’ would be allowing ballot access to a candidate who didn’t meet the prerequisites. This court ruling appears appropriate, based on information I have at hand.
Hey now, half the duopoly has another solution to the duopoly, but I’m not sure it’s what you had in mind…