Spoiler argument still not made in US Senate race

I still think it humorous that many before the election would say things like "A vote for Cynthia McKinney is a vote for McCain!" Really? Ted Cross and Chris Candreva of Obama Election Watch sure felt so. So Ted and Chris, please define my vote for me. I thought I voted for McKinney, and Obama won. I feel let down by their expertise on democracy.

Here in Minnesota, I have yet to hear who knows who Dean Barkley "spoiled." Perhaps that is because NO ONE KNOWS who will be our next US Senator. Was it Norm Coleman? Was it Al Franken? Where are all those people who would have derided the Barkley campaign had a winner actually been announced? Dean Barkley may not have been a perfect candidate, but since we do not have NOTA ( none of the above ) on the ballot, he was my next best choice.

The Coleman-Franken ads were some of the worst in Minnesota political history. Their ad hominem campaigns contributed little to raising consciousness of Minnesotans on REAL issues. Dean Barkley was the only positive campaign that did try to change the consciousness of Minnesotans on fiscal sanity, fair trade ( not free trade), opposing the death penalty, energy as a national security issue, etc.

What did anyone learn from Coleman-Franken apart from name calling? Does anyone, apart from hardcore partisans, really feel that they are legitimate to represent our state after their negative campaigning?

Obviously, I believe that Instant Runoff Voting would have helped resolve this situation better. Not only would Minnesota have representation in the US Senate, in addition to Amy Klobuchar, but the negative campaigning would be greatly curtailed. IRV forces candidates to stick to postive messages, and even agree publicly with their opponents on issues. If candidates do this, they can get a #2 or #3 vote and could still win.

Many claim that IRV hurts third parties. Yet 2006 in Burlington, Vermont a Progressive Party member was elected as mayor. In a traditional election, it would have gone to the Democrat.

In Minneapolis, voters are "scared" a Republican could win( even though we have no elected Republicans). In 61B, many voters literally were frightened that a Green was running, because "a Republican could win!" These ignorant voters do not realize that only 5% of their neighbors voted for the GOP candidate, and 30% for the Green. Yet, fear motivates many whereas logic is difficult to adhere to in our culture. IRV eliminates the illogical "fear factor" of voting for a Green or independent.

We need more electoral reform than IRV, like proportional representation or a more digital democracy. But in Minnesota, IRV has the inertia and I think it should be used for statewide elections.