Too Many Candidates Undermine Democratic Elections – IOTW Report

Too Many Candidates Undermine Democratic Elections

American Thinker-

Democratic elections require at least two candidates, both of which, at least in principle, have a shot at winning. But, while two office-seekers may be the minimum, is there a maximum? Might adding candidates eventually diminish the election’s democratic character? Let me suggest that the answer is “yes,” — -a plethora of choices undermines democracy. Mae West’s quip that too much of a good thing is great does not apply to democratic election.

Recent presidential primaries — 17 candidates in the 2016 Republican primary and, most recently, 24 candidates (so far) in the 2020 Democratic primary — perfectly illustrate the unfortunate consequences when voters are overwhelmed; culling the herd to down to three or four would far better serve democracy.

Most plainly, if we assume that voters should have at least minimal information prior to pulling the lever, it is obvious that information costs correspondently grow as ballot choice expands. It is arduous enough to be even moderately informed in a two-person contest but having even a modicum of information about a dozen-plus candidates is beyond the reach of all but political aficionados. Everything usually just comes down to name recognition (think Joe Biden). Can the average voter watching a debate digest a dozen or more glibly stated plans addressing climate change or any other issue, for that matter?

Moreover, given the high cost of gathering detailed information on too many competitors, superficial information must suffice. Seth Mouton, Steve Bullock, Michael Bennet, John Delaney, John Hickenlooper and Tim Ryan will invariably be reduced to a group of generic “middle-aged white males.”  while Tulsi Gabbard is just one of several female candidates. It is no wonder that identify politics triumphs when the list of candidates is so long — it is often the only fact that can be discerned and remembered. read more

15 Comments on Too Many Candidates Undermine Democratic Elections

  1. why do they call it the Democratic Debates?

    … because ‘Insane Clown Posse’ was already taken

    (same goes for the Squad … hell, the whole D’rat party!)

    6
  2. Fuck this millennial writer. kids nothing but a bitchtress. Choice is tooooo hard? Too many candidates in a PRIMARY causes you brain hurt?

    Just LOL. Fuggin’ Jr. High level premise, writing, and editing.

    10
  3. @Aaron Burr – Thank you! I was delighted by your comment.
    Spot on!

    I couldn’t even get through the article excerpt here at iOTW because of the writer’s insufferable condescension, his ignorance, and wildly wrong assumptions.

    …a plethora of choices undermines democracy.

    What democracy are you referring to, dummy? I do get so tired of saying this, but the U.S.A. is a constitutional republic, and the only “democracy” involved is in the election of representatives.

    …the unfortunate consequences when voters are overwhelmed; culling the herd to down to three or four would far better serve democracy.

    See above re: democracy. Plus @Anonymous (10:34 PM) correctly points out that this would have put JEB! on the ballot. Bad! Bad! Bad!

    …It is arduous enough to be even moderately informed in a two-person contest…

    I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry at that assertion, but I did know that I had already read too much of Robert Weissberg’s stinking horse shit.

    8
  4. Yes … the Politburo should decide who the candidate is … or the candidates, rather.

    The milling sheep, waiting to be sheared and their transformation into mutton, shouldn’t have to worry their pretty heads about such confusing matters as “who wears the bell?”, or “who carries the staff?”

    Isn’t this, exactly, why we have Central Committees?

    Seems that choice is only good when it’s “choice” (as in the murder of the innocents) and not choice (as in electing our agents and representatives).

    Perhaps that’s why our Founders set up a Republic – and not a Democracy?

    In a period where this kind of tripe passes as erudition we can’t really expect any kind of honest debate.

    And Cory Booger’s calling for a Federal consolidation of police forces!
    He takes his cues from Himmler and Beria (and Hoover).

    Scary times.

    izlamo delenda est …

    1
  5. Uncle Al, I have been screaming (well, not really screaming) at people on Twitter the difference between democracy and our Constitutional Republic.

    FDR gave a speech ‘declaring’ the USA a democracy, and since then, the two hundred years of ‘settled history’ was slowly erased. Now, I don’t think even history teachers know the difference.

    That was not just an offhand remark, either. I think they did it to set us up with people who have no idea how this government was set up to run.

    They succeeded, the fu##ers.

    3

Comments are closed.