. . . maybe that’s not the point. I mean for elections and all it’s nice that this dichotomy of basic ideologies has developed. Hell when Clinton won in 92 he had only 43% of the popular vote and that was because of Perot (remember him?) The political process has many avenues for variety in candidates but I think it’s good that there are only a few people fighting for the big chair. It forces compromise and sure it creates a mediocrity in the moderation of ideology but that prevents cataclysm. I believe that since we are a Republic of independent states, that is where the real power of the individual lies. In my State of California there are Propositions and in my County of Humboldt there are Measures all of which have a much greater bearing on my day to day life (if any at all). Do I want to pay an extra cent on the dollar so local services can keep on keepin’ on? Or do I want to modify the 3 strikes law, OR fund stem cell research in the form of a bond initiative? These are the things that will stimulate or dismantle the commerce of the state and result in either making my home town a nice place or a not-so-nice place. And that is my 2 cents on the importance of exercising democratic power.
Now what is plurality and where is it okay in my opinion? Award shows! That’s right if there are more than 3 nominees then chances are the winner is just good and not “the best.” I recently read a live journal by director Paul Feig discussing his difficulty in going through the process of getting his film to be in a position to be nominated. He talks about his frustrations with the new rules for striving for that Oscar glory in this diary which I found to be insightful and amusing [that’s the best kind]. Here is a link to the second part of a director’s diary, enjoy. http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/562/562383p1.html