Ralph Nader should invest his time and money better

[Jake]

Why should the people who voted for Jim Robinson have another choice. They chose a candidate, he lost, get over it.

[Jake]

No, the system should be one vote for one person, not one vote for Jim, but if he loses one vote for Tim, but if he loses one vote for Arnold.  And actually, third party votes in 2004 split almost evenly right down the middle between Republican leaners (LP, Constitution) and Democrat leaners (P&F, Grn, Nader, and the various socialist parties). In no state would third party votes tip the balance one way or another unless all LP, Grn, and Nader voters went for Kerry in NM.  In 2000, only Florida would switch hands if 3rd party votes were distributed to each major party. Plus, a IRV system would mean a Bush 41 win in 1992.  So, obviously, you are wrong to claim that a majority of third party voters would vote Democrat. Only in 2000 has this been the case, 1980, 1988, 1992, 1996 are all years where more third party voters would've voted Republican instead of Democrat.

[Jake]

IRV would be a token gesture by the major parties to keep 3rd parties from ever growing large enough to challenge them. It effectively prevents any third party from winning a state, much less an election.