Yeah, I agree with them. Ranked Choice voting is extremely confusing. First you have to rank the candidates in the order you prefer to win, then…oh wait, no. It’s really not confusing at all.
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
799 points (95.8% liked)
politics
19120 readers
3664 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
But these poor black people can't count to five!
How fucking patronizing.
As a citizen of a country with ranked choice voting the hardest thing is choosing which of the loonies you want to put last!
Is it patronizong if it's backed by data? The article discusses how they're not just claiming it's confusing for these districts out of nothing, they're pointing to existing voting data that shows when there are multiple seats to fill for the same position, such as City Council seats, voters in these districts neglect to cast votes for the additional seats at a higher rate than other districts. "Undervoting" it's apparently called.
This is a horrifically self-serving bullshit "solution" to this problem, but there does appear to be a real problem that ought to be addressed as part of a ranked-choice rollout.
Sounds like there just needs to be a little bit of voter education rather than scrapping the whole thing.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I would need to see the ballot to say for sure, but the article lists this example:
"The lawsuit notes that in elections for at-large seats on the DC city council — where voters can currently choose two candidates — voters in Wards 7 and 8 are less likely to cast a second vote, a phenomenon known as "undervoting.""
So, when presented with a relatively simple "Vote For Two" choice, Ward 7 and 8 are less likely to vote for a second person.
If that's a problem, then the idea of not only voting for multiple people, but ranking them 1-2-3, may be a big issue.
Remember, back in 2000 Florida voters struggled with the butterfly ballot.
But in the end, this could be solved by a combination of education, clear instructions, and an easy to understand ballot design.
But undervoting isn't really a problem. No one is being disenfranchised by not casting a second vote (or ranking all options), they just aren't availing themselves of the full range of options. Even just voting for one person could be an intentional choice if you don't really care about the other options or want your first choice to have a better chance of winning an expected head-to-head.
This is at worst an indicator the government should run some informational campaigns, not a reason not to use multi-voting systems.
load more comments
(11 replies)
I get this in theory but it gave me the hilarious mental image of someone gathering their phone, keys, wallet, going to their local polling station, showing their ID, walking to the voting machine, then thinking, "Oh no, I'm allowed to vote for TWO people?" and immediately bolting out the door.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
This is about protecting establishment career politicians, not about what voters want and not about what they are capable of understanding.
Estblishment corporate dems 🤝 All elected republicans:
Disenfranchising the American people in the name of job security.
Damnit democrats all I want from you is voting reform and then we can move onto better parties.
Although I guess this is them realizing that and not wanting to let go.
load more comments
(2 replies)
DNC loves calling poor people too stupid to help themselves. Insane that they don't get called out more on this.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Why would only Black Neighborhoods be confused by this? Elaborate.... No go ahead, be my guest, you brought it up, now tell me.
Because they might vote for an outsider candidate, and they might win.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Goddamnit democrats. This is some republican shit.
I'll be the last person to say that both sides same bullshit, but Democrats are still politicians. They seek positions of influence and power, and they need public support to do it. There's a certain type of person who thrives in that environment, and they are absolutely the last type of person you want in leadership roles.
Anyone who is currently in power will oppose ranked choice voting because it breaks up the monolithic power structure that so many powerful people use as leverage. It reduces the effectiveness of wedge issues, which means leaders will actually have to present nuanced opinions on many topics. It decreases extremism, which means their opponents will likely be closer ideologically to themselves, all of which is better for the voters and worse for the politicians.
Democrats in power love that the GOP has become unhinged. It makes the rational choice incredibly easy. Ranked choice will break up both parties into smaller categories, killing the demon they would rather be fighting.
load more comments
(10 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
using racist dog whistles to protect shit policies for the entrenched benefactors of said shit policies.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The system will fight to prevent systemic changes that weaken the system.
Is it just me or is this statement blatantly racist? Black people are too stupid and so we must limit the way they vote? Where did I hear that before? The democratic party knows they'll lose power if they implemented, but to stoop that low...
load more comments
(18 replies)
This is the same, tired argument Sarah Palin and other Republicans made here in Alaska when it didn't go their way. How stupid do you think voters are? If they're that easily confused, maybe do a better job at educating them, in say, a classroom when they're young. Maybe bring back Civics classes.
Then they couldn’t push blue-no-matter-who. The threat of the republic party is their primary means of staying elected. They can’t give us more options. It’s be against their interests.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Oh no, poor people are too dumb to know that the only right choice is the corporate democrat! They might want people who represent their interest and not just some guy who will uphold the status quo!
The more I think about it this is a brilliant strategy for democrats to establish ranked choice nationally. Nothing gets a republican harder then something the democrats don't want. And if I've learned anything if conservatives want something it is all but inevitable.
load more comments
(2 replies)
"Someone could get the most votes, and not win!" McCarthy said at the time.. "So if you come in 3rd, you win. What? 'I got a lot of second votes, I got a lot of 3rd vote — what does that mean?'"
I don't think it's the "Black areas" that are getting confused about how it works. Or perhaps he's just pretending to not understand? 🤔🤔
load more comments
(1 replies)
If the dems actually cared about the voters, their primaries wouldnt be rigged.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Don't patronize your own voters. Not a good idea.
How else are establishment Democrats gonna stay in power? They're afraid they're going to lose to progressive candidates. Voters are going to vote more confidently in the candidates they believe in rather than the ones they believe will win. In rank voting there's less fear that the worst candidate will win since it's not a 1 or the other anymore.
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Ranked choice voting is like the little brother of March Madness brackets, and plenty of people take part in that every year.
This is entirely about wanting to force strategic voting so as to not lose power for the mainstream within their own party.
When you can win under an unrepresentative voting system even good people will feel compelled to hood onto that.
What a terrible excuse too, if you think someone is ignorant then enlighten them. Teach voting systems to the public.
load more comments
(1 replies)
What is confusing about, " pick your favorite, pick your second favorite"? You think if you asked them the same question about ice cream, they would be confused? Also, you don't HAVE to pick more than one. My understanding is that if you vote for an eliminated candidate, then your 2nd choice will be used on the next round. But they don't even need to know that to pick their favorite ice cream. It seems good for democracy? Someone let me know why it isn't.
Both sides are scared to death to lose power. It's a nice little rig they have. They more or less choose your options and you vote for one.
Ranked choice makes it FAR easier for an independent to make it in and dismantle the rest of their two-party shenanigans.
It's not confusing. It could let in a third party, they don't like that.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Remember: Democrats are just as dependent on FPTP for power as republicans
load more comments
(4 replies)
I find it interesting that politicians never seem to make this argument about taxes.
load more comments
(4 replies)
See, this is the sort of shit folks are talking about when they say both parties are the same.
Absolutely not. Criticize things like this is correct but this does not equate to a coup, banning abortion and gender care. Don't give ammo to a shit takinge point.
load more comments
(1 replies)
A rare instance, on some issue, because a broken clock is right twice a day.
And yet... gestures broadly to the numerous liberal progressive Democrats
You won't find that side in the Republican party lol.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
yea i like to make up complete bullshit all the time
If it's actually confusing then put in the effort to explain it better. But I seriously doubt it would confuse people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Sounds like a racist excuse from people who want to keep their power.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Well well well if it isn't the hard bigotry of no expectations
Cool that's not racist at all
Of course they do, an the Republicans as well.
They don't want to give up their power to some random amazing third party. They want to keep the power between the 2 of them.
load more comments
(8 replies)
view more: next ›