This is great but I think we need to be more strategic instead of tactical.
At the Center for Election Science, we’re advocating for simple structural reforms to the voting method, which would dramatically improve our options and diminish extremists like Trump. There is massive empirical and statistical evidence that Trump would have had no chance with a system such as Approval Voting or Score Voting for example.
Approval Voting means you get a normal ballot but can vote for as many candidates as you want. Score Voting is just rating the candidates on a scale, like 0–5. William Poundstone’s book Gaming the Vote is a fascinating exposition of these and other alternative voting methods from a game theory perspective.
Silicon Valley elites like you and Sam Altman are pushing for a local maximum. Alternative voting methods represent an entirely different paradigm. The human-welfare-increasing impact of these systems can be objectively quantified via Monte Carlo simulation and expressed as “Bayesian Regret”. We see from those figures that this area of reform simply dominates competing more “intuitively obvious” ideas like increasing turnout or public campaign financing.
Please give this your consideration.
Co-founder, The Center for Election Science