> This is the flaw the non-proportional representation system we have in
> this country. It seems to me that an effort to change the voting
> system (including abolishing the Electoral College) makes more sense
> than running a candidate who cannot win.
I think this is one of the planks in Nader's platform, and of course it is also advocated by the GP and every other small party. The problems I see are:
(1) As I have said before, countries that have proportional representational systems don't seen to have any stronger Lefts than we do, probably because they also have Right parties, and also because just changing the voting system doesn't change the basic beliefs and world-views of the people. As Marx pointed out, these are generally the ideas of the ruling class of the epoch. Systems which make it easier to organize n-th (third, fourth, ...) parties basically benefit people who find it enjoyable and rewarding to spend their time organizing parties, but this includes conservatives, neo-Nazis, etc., also. After the parties are organized, they still have to compromise (or not) with each other to set up governments. In the U.S., this compromising activity occurs within the major parties.
(2) The electoral college will probably never be abolished, because a constitutional amendment requires 3/4 of the states to sign onto it, and there are too many small states which benefit from the EC to allow it to pass.
That said, I would definitely support abolishing the EC, and I hope that one day voters in the smaller states will come around. (I also favor the metric system, and hope Americans one day come to love it, but I'm not holding my breath).