Well we agree on a lot, so that’s OK. I would entertain a lot of possible reforms but in general I don’t believe people should be treated differently in different states. If I were setting it up myself, I’d use electronic Ranked Choice Voting over 3-5 months during the debates with no distinction between the states at all. Voters can change their vote at any time. Tallies of votes would be made periodically to see who is ahead and who wants to bow out. That isn’t going to happen, but I lean towards treating voters equally so though anything is better than what we have now, I probably wouldn’t support your proposal over more equitable ones regardless of the money issue.
Cool idea to let people continually change their vote as time goes on so presumably things converge over time to a true consensus. That’s the type of thing that should be tried by a small party like the Greens who have a difficult time organizing regular voting but would have no disadvantage in electronic systems like this one and the type that @natureboy often advocates.
Sorry for the late response Hector. I’m not sure about reading it, I quickly tried looking it up but couldn’t find it (perhaps more time would give a positive result), but I also don’t think they want the rank and file to know about the change.
This link is to Redacted Tonight, I trust Lee Camp to do his homework:
Hope this helps.
Spot on Tom, as usual.