Ranked Choice Voting
Dec 31, 2023 09:27:20 #
LogicallyRight wrote:
Sounds like the one most acceptable to most people and at a greater position of bringing everyone together. The other two are totally divisive
I Disagree
Dec 31, 2023 09:31:15 #
LogicallyRight wrote:
I don't like her. but I don't live in or vote in Alaska. It is what they wanted and rank choice had nothing to do with it.
That is your opinion of course.
Lisa Murkowski hangs on to Senate seat in Alaska's ranked choice voting
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2022/11/24/Lisa-Murkowski-Senate-rank-choice-Alaska/3751669298535/
Dec 31, 2023 09:34:38 #
LogicallyRight wrote:
***You need to use a fact checker since you swallow everything you hear that is ultra far right.
>>>You need to use a balanced unbiased fact checker since you swallow everything you hear that is ultra far left.
>>>You need to use a balanced unbiased fact checker since you swallow everything you hear that is ultra far left.
There is no unbiased balanced fact checker available since Democrats created the “alternative facts”.
Dec 31, 2023 10:23:28 #
Turtle keeper wrote:
There is no unbiased balanced fact checker available since Democrats created the “alternative facts”.
There are facts and then there are Democrat facts. That's what I see.
Dec 31, 2023 17:43:09 #
Turtle keeper wrote:
There is no unbiased balanced fact checker available since Democrats created the “alternative facts”.
You are so wrong. It was a republican who said Trump truths were alternative facts.
Dec 31, 2023 17:46:44 #
RascalRiley wrote:
You are so wrong. It was a republican who said Trump truths were alternative facts.
Provide your evidence/link. You are dishonest and not to be trusted.
Dec 31, 2023 18:13:55 #
American Vet wrote:
Provide your evidence/link. You are dishonest and not to be trusted.
Your must be old if you have forgotten the origin of ‘alternative facts’.
Dec 31, 2023 18:14:53 #
RascalRiley wrote:
Your must be old if you have forgotten the origin of ‘alternative facts’.
IOW, you cannot.
Obviously you are lying.
Jan 2, 2024 01:37:54 #
LogicallyRight
Loc: Chicago
American Vet wrote:
***Ranked choice voting is a scheme to disconnect elections from issues and allow candidates with marginal support from voters to win.
>>>BS. People still have to put forth issues. Nothing stops that. They are all vetted and not just the two representing the two major parties. Which often might be popular within their party, but evil for America. With primaries it is often the person on the extremes who rises to the top and then presents himself as moderate (lies) in the General election. With ranked choice, these extreme choices can be eliminated for a consensus candidate near the middle that most people either like or can live with instead of some extremist.
***It obscures true debates and issue-driven dialogs among candidates and eliminates genuine binary choices between two top-tier candidates. Who makes those fictional two top tier candidates the choices of Americans? The press? The parties? Screw them. we are the voters and we deserve a chance to vet them all at once and pick the one best suited for American and not just some extreme party hack.
***It also disenfranchises voters, because ballots that do not include the two ultimate finalists are cast aside to manufacture a faux majority for the winner.
>>>That is a false interpretation of how it works.
______________________________
You rage on about the Alaska vote. If all of the Republicans voted for Republicans as one and two, a Republican would have won. But to many voted for a Republican as one and three and gave the Democrat the edge with a lot of one and two votes. People need to learn how to do it and it works fine.
___________________
That being said, there are many different ways of voting that are similar and far better then the system we have now, party control and extremists winning, either right or left and neither good for America.
Jan 2, 2024 02:33:34 #
LogicallyRight wrote:
***Ranked choice voting is a scheme to disconnect ... (show quote)
It would be fairer if the top 2 candidates, regardless of party, advance to a run off election. Then you would have a candidate that was actually favored by the majority of voters. Their policies would be clear cut as to their differences and the issues they focus on.
Jan 2, 2024 08:23:55 #
Kickaha wrote:
It would be fairer if the top 2 candidates, regardless of party, advance to a run off election. Then you would have a candidate that was actually favored by the majority of voters. Their policies would be clear cut as to their differences and the issues they focus on.
I agree with that - 50% + to win any election.
Jan 2, 2024 08:42:35 #
Kickaha wrote:
It would be fairer if the top 2 candidates, regardless of party, advance to a run off election. Then you would have a candidate that was actually favored by the majority of voters. Their policies would be clear cut as to their differences and the issues they focus on.
Runoffs and ranked voting are similar. If a voters first choice is eliminated they would probably vote for their second choice in a runoff.
Jan 2, 2024 09:12:40 #
RascalRiley wrote:
Runoffs and ranked voting are similar. If a voters first choice is eliminated they would probably vote for their second choice in a runoff.
Good point.
Jan 3, 2024 22:52:23 #
LogicallyRight
Loc: Chicago
Kickaha wrote:
It would be fairer if the top 2 candidates, regardless of party, advance to a run off election. Then you would have a candidate that was actually favored by the majority of voters. Their policies would be clear cut as to their differences and the issues they focus on.
Agreed. And I believe ranked choice or something similar achieves that in one election instead of the expenses of two.
Jan 3, 2024 22:53:37 #
LogicallyRight
Loc: Chicago
RascalRiley wrote:
Runoffs and ranked voting are similar. If a voters first choice is eliminated they would probably vote for their second choice in a runoff.
That is the point.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.