Letter: Approval voting doesn't work
In response to "Gehrig-Piepkorn wins highlight need for approval voting" published June 14:
Jacob P. Scott has figured it out! To avoid electing those "very unpopular" candidates (they probably kick their dogs), let's make sure everyone gets lots of votes. Let's use approval voting. Think of the advantages: No need to research the candidates; we won't need yard signs; we'll exercise good guessing, not good thinking; we will garner higher voting numbers; voting machines will work harder to count all the extra darkened ovals; everyone's ego wins!
If you think an idea promoted by the socialist stronghold of Sweden, where the income tax rate of 61.85 percent, and promoted by the Democratic Socialists of America like Barack Obama, Ralph Nader, Bernie Sanders and the Tooth Fairy, then you should also like awarding a participation award to each Super Bowl team, no need to play the game; all traffic lights flashing amber and Big Macs made only with lettuce and special sauce to avoid offending livestock.
Wake up! The voters voted. The winners won. They did their homework.
The losers lost. They are sad.
If you think approval voting is the answer, let's just conduct a lottery of all interested candidates and then take turns after that so everyone can feel wanted.
No major governance system uses this method. There is a reason. It doesn't work.
Seigel lives in Moorhead.