That's not exactly how I meant it, having 50% of the country unhappy with who was elected isn't bad because peoples feelings get hurt or their ego is bruised, it is bad because it splits the country in two, and makes it harder for the government to do their job.
@Lansfield, yeah, basically like the youtube like system.
What made me think of this was because how people were talking in this thread,
https://www.newschoolers.com/ns/forums/readthread/thread_id/707837/
and several people saying they couldn't vote for a candidate like Gary Johnson because the election will be too close.
As Rachy said,
"this election is far too close for me to vote for my candidate of choice. I will be voting for the lesser of the two evils rather than for my own party. Not because I believe it is the right thing to do, but because I feel we will be even further away from my ideals if for some reason the wrong candidate did go into place."
So, I thought, you really should be able to vote for more than one person, that way, you can vote for who you want to, and against who you don't want to. So the ballot would look like this...
Gary Johnson Approve ( ) Disapprove ( )
Barack Obama Approve ( ) Disapprove ( )
Mitt Romney Approve ( ) Disapprove ( )
Jill Stein Approve ( ) Disapprove ( )
So lets say the ballot looked like this, whoever had the most 'approve' votes would win the presidency, and maybe rather than basically half the country voting for Obama and half the country voting for Romney, either one could win with 60-70% of the voting populous approving them.
