And because STV would
let voters list as many candidates as they wished in order of choice, they never need to waste their votes or vote tactically.
Not exact matches
Instead,
let's
list the various stances that we've seen espoused by actual
voters, in general order of popularity:
Also on the NYC Indy Party reform to - do
list: Initiative and referendum, term limits for legislators,
letting voters change their enrollment after a one - month waiting period, nonpartisan administration of the Board of Elections, nonpartisan redistricting and campaign finance reform.
TechPresident reports that the Obama campaign tested their new «Dashboard» system to
let volunteers from around the country make calls into Wisconsin, the AFL - CIO has trialed software that matches
voter lists with volunteers» Facebook friends to
let them call targets that they actually know rather than total strangers, and the Walker campaign combined VoIP with digital
voter files to automate the connection between identification calls and data entry.
There are a number of proportional voting systems, but in general, they
let each
voter select a party, the party has an ordered
list of candidates, and each party is allocated seats to assign to their candidates in proportion to the number of votes the party received.
Of course a candidate needs to spend some cash but
let's suppose that billboard and TV ads were banned, the local party sent out emails to all members on behalf of every short
listed candidate, and the taxpayer (or central party) covered the cost of a single mailshot to all
voters.