In his opinion piece, Eric Kleefeld claimed that the two-party system of the United States is the ultimate electoral system since it provides \stability"" (""U.S. two-party system ensures stability,"" April 23). Following this logic, wouldn't a one-party system provide even more stability? And the United States is almost there! Al Gore and President Bush represented the same interests and the same ideologies in the 2000 election.
I know that I would be willing to give up Kleefeld's idea of stability (not having two conservatives in a run-off election) for democracy and real choices.
France has a consistent voter turn out of around 85 percent (not below 50 percent like most of the United States). Maybe this is because the French feel that they actually have choices.
With San Francisco having run-off elections, maybe the instability will finally cause California to crash into the ocean.
