So this topic is a bit askew to voting theory, but I just wanted to start/provide a space for discussions about the effects that voting systems can have on candidate pools and candidate nomination/acceptance, and vice versa. I personally think the space between ordinary social interaction and the formalization of social decision-making through voting is intriguing, for example, party formation and nomination processes. Here are some of the initial questions I have, maybe they can start a discussion:
What processes do you think are ideal for candidate selection, and what processes do you think are realistic? How many candidates do you think voters will typically be faced with on their ballots when the spoiler effect is eliminated and smaller parties and political entities have more incentives to invest in a campaign? How many candidates is too many? What are the pros and cons of large candidate pools, and what are the reasonable ways to manage them? Do large candidate pools have any unexpected affects on voting systems in practice? How much of a difference do you think a spoiler-less voting system will make against duopolization, and in what way?
I know that voting systems can theoretically manage any number of candidates. One issue that comes to mind for me is competition for media attention, voters being bombarded with too many political ads, and not having enough knowledge about any single candidate to make a well-informed decision. While plurality is garbage, it does have incentives in place to keep the candidate pool small—too small, but too big is also bad. Are there other voting systems that are reasonably good that also encourage the public to stick with candidate pools of sizes that are likely to have sufficient variety without being overwhelming?
Whatever thoughts about this that come to mind are welcome.