What if you never had to vote for the lesser of two evils again? Ranked Choice Voting is a small tweak that would be a huge step towards fixing our broken elections.
We no longer have a choice!!!! Any non-biased human with common sense, a need to know and a computer realizes our election was manipulated by Dominion voting machines and dishonest Liberals who pulled all kinds of stunts so that Conservatives would be unable to witness their illegal actions. Welcome to the USSA where our POTUS with Dementia or Alzheimers is being used as a puppet and has become the butt of most jokes and is being laughed at by all other countries including Australia, Russia and China! And our Tax $$ is being used in ways OF WHICH NO SANE PERSON would APPROVE So.......We are in BIG TROUBLE FOLKS! The only reason people have wanted to come to the United States is because we have had a Constitution that provided & secured our freedoms which other countries don't have. However, we were infiltrated by those who think the UN's idea for a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT IS A GOOD IDEA! The UN and Control freak/Communist Wannabees have had an agenda that they have been gradually implementing since THE 1950s. That plan was published in the 50's and recorded in our 1963 Congressional record. Check out THE 45 Communist Goals. ONE more thing, Brainwashing has been implement in colleges since 1960. I know this for a fact because I saved my text books.
RCV requires a voter to betray favorites unless believed to be dead last (and no other candidate will reach majority before runoff).
RCV doesn't solve what's claimed. RCV entrenches the two parties (Duverger's Law). "Approval Voting" tears down the two party system. Easily, cheaply, obviously. AV eliminates "lesser of evils", "fear of wasted vote", "favorite betrayal" strategies. EC, RCV, IRV are complex distractions that don't solve the two party problem. Vote for all approved candidates, the highest count wins; Same old ballots, same counting machines. Just better. It's how you'd select restaurants, outfits, vacations, any election seeking the widest satisfaction from multiple options is "Approval Voting".
Approval voting is simpler and eliminates the spoiler effect more than RCV.
I like ranked choice as a concept. The problem goes much deeper than simply making a lil tweaky poo to the elections. Major media outlets control the amount of public exposure that candidates get. And if a certain media outlet leans for a certain candidate but controls a major amount of public attention, then the “lesser party” candidates will still fall by the wayside. Its more than just giving people extra options, its about making them realize that there really are more than 2. Also, what about the way that the DNC and RNC are run? Those cant be regulated by a law and yet the same issue still mucks up intra-party politics.
They can't get voting rite let alone complicate it more by default have mercy.
Don't forget. What we need to do is get rid of the Electoral College too and nationally and directly elect the President of the United States 🇺🇲 using EXACTLY what is explained in this video!
Can we just get rid of the political parties to begin with they are the biggest problem
The movement for voting-system reform (or revolution) is tragically divided into two camps. One camp says, give us what we want in the single-winner case, that is the most important thing, and we won’t show any solidarity about seating legislators. The other camp is the other way around. They say, we will concentrate on optimizing voting for legislative seats, and we will throw the single-winner case under the bus. At least one of these camps and probably both are polluted by paid staffers, who experience a conflict between their interest in continuing to make a living off the movement and any interest in a campaign for democracy or democratic republicanism. [Hub copy of the above screed is at 1787regime.wordpress.com/2021/01/10/movement-for-democracy-divided-and-conquered/]
Its stili 2 party system tho. The parties that can't get enough votes get cancelled anyway.
Yes, but then after the results are revealed, we get to see how much votes the smaller parties would get. Then over many election cycles, the bigger parties need to start paying more attention to the smaller parties or risk being overtaken. They probably will not but the bigger parties need to incorporate policies from the smaller parties in order to guarantee staying in power. This in turn makes everyone's views more represented.
0:29 why is trust funders on there twice? lol
This is a blatant lie. Instant Runoff Voting still has the lesser of two evils problem, just like how my aunt voted for Biden even though she preferred Warren, to advance the strongest candidate to the next round against Trump. If she had ranked them in IRV, it would have thus been an insincere 1st vote to Biden. Here's a guy who did his math PhD thesis on voting methods to prove it. althe.info/number/sKescYecgoOaqbY/video
This is what all the Modern Democracies needs specially India where B team helps the main Evil to win.
althe.info/home/OwlDgcgFHXmHsyddWp_3Gw.html It would be good to use Approval voting instead for the Voting system
as an Australian, you need this! we also get much better quality minor party candidates here, because we don't have the spoiler effect to scare them off.
I would much rather have approval vs elimination voting. If that moderate was acceptable to 60% of concervatives and 60% of progressives as well as their own 20%, we could have a candidate 80% of the population approves of vs 51.1vs 48.9. Much more unifying vs polarizing.
thank you, Represent Us
I dont see how someone winning because they were a lot of people's second choice is more fair. This'll only encourage people to help elect the lesser of two evils
Why isn't the link in the description? It's Represent.us
Ok, I dont see how this would fix anything. In the end those votes would still go to trump, and this breaks our two party system in what way? let say you have four candidates the independs never win so those votes would still go to the party your registered under. As in if you vote conservatives you will vote republican, still dont see how this fixes anything.
The idea is that independents would have a better chance to build their base and 3rd parties would have a better chance to win. They would have a chance because there would cease to be a spoiler effect. IF you are more mild of a conservative you might vote for someone more in the middle but you HATE democrats and you know that a 3rd party vote just helps the democrats as you split the votes amongst your party(as explained in the video). But with this new strategy, as a voter you feel your choice matters more and you are less afraid to vote for a 3rd party or other such people because even if they lose your vote still goes tot he person you preferred most among the remaining options.
This system will making vote counting costly and time consuming especially when voters are in millions and vote through ballot paper(countries like america)
ranked choice IS the establishment ranked choice voting is treason and unconstitutional, take money from bankers and end trade and landlording, and end offshore work build thorium safe atomic end foriegn aid and make everythign here moving peoelp from uselss non production liek teacher social workers professor lawyer judge insurance shrink etc to manufaturing n farming mass produce houses so dirt cheap and of cours ehave baby license and no immigration deport all ilegalls and collaborators and 2 year hard labor jail for gay displays in pubklic
*2 years hard labor for gay public display* Man I guess you hate freedom then.
I'm still surprised that these non-academic reform groups (like Wolfpac and Represent) continue to avoid academic work. The reforms they propose have little if any data to support them. Often times it is just the opposite. The only 'academic' work in favor of term-limits for example is by a tobacco shill published by the Mercatus Center. Since 2016 we have worked on a 'fix' for campaign finance and partisanship that has not just been proven to work, but has been discussed by academics (and supported by the Framers of the Constitution) for decades. The trouble is the idea isn't sexy. It entails reversing the 1970 Legislative Reorganization Act. This is a law that most academics aren't even familiar with. Simply put it opened committees to the public. But the public that came storming in were the corporate lobbyists. And the data on this transition is jarring. By enabling lobbyists, both campaign finance and corporate lobbying exploded. And has been on a steady and steep rise ever since (Citizens United is just a blip of a data point in the middle). We spoke about this reform last year at Represent dot US. It was supported (even in the live video) by Larry Lessig. It got a fantastic review from the crowd. But the bigwigs at organizations like Represent, Wolfpac and Unite continue to push for unproven work that receives little to no support from anyone who actually churns the data. So I'll repeat, if we can reverse the 1970 LRA, we expect immediate drops in lobbying, campaign finance, partisanship, etc. This conclusion appears readily in the data and the work of hundreds of academics. So why? why? why? do these orgs continue to ignore it?
This video is also wildly misleading. We have a representative republic and an elector system. Your vote on national candidates are tallied and given to our electors (one per senator and House member) to cast their vote. I'll repeat it for those in the back for clarity. WE. DO. NOT. HAVE. A. DEMOCRACY. Your'e all trying to fix a problem that exists in a different form of government.
If you vote a 3rd party and they are eliminated, you are STILL VOTING FOR THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS. Look at the SF board of Supervisors vote from 2010. The winner won with a total of 4321 votes after 9608 ballots were discarded for being exhausted. So 9608 ballots DID NOT COUNT but those individuals did show up and cast a vote. The point of ranked choice is to allow a ranking. I rank 1 person. Thus your dream system suppresses and invalidates more votes than the system you want to replace. I want all votes to count. This does not make that possible. This is an EVIL form of vote suppression. www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-whats-wrong-with-ranked-choice-voting-20191101-k7o2s57h5bfrxoorisjw4zrp2i-story.html
I think the word "transfer" vote can be confusing. Rank choice voting moves to the next lower tier when the higher choices are not viable; moving down or stepping down in the voter's sequential selections. Say my 1st choice is not the majority, then my vote goes to my 2nd, if 2nd fails to get majority, then my 3rd choice moves up, and etc. My vote is not transferred to another voter, it moves progressively down my line of choices.
Except there are usually more than two independent candidates, so this isn't really a great comparison.
Ranked choice voting isn’t monotonic
Doesn't make sense. Do you mean that all the 1st choice votes get tallied, and held? Then if your 1st choice is not the 1st winner, your vote is pulled and applied to your 2nd choice, Then all votes tallied again? Sounds like an NBA draft. Lol.
Ranked Ballots still marginalize 3rd parties, but proportional representation gives everyone actual representation.
This is how Unity2020 is voting for the two final candidates to run in 2020 against Donald and Joe. althe.info/number/r3qioqOLZ2qKptg/video&feature=emb_logo
RCV slows the voting process. Third world traffic jams at the polls as confused voters study the ballots in Maine. Long lines discourage the elderly and the weak from voting. Most youth vote liberal. Rigged. Glad Bernie dropped out of the race; he was a youth draw that covid disqualified. MAGA! President Trump 2020.
As a Trump supporter I think STAR Voting is way better
We have this in Maine it’s a joke it only helps Dems get elected and that’s why they pushed for it you get one vote not two,three or fourth chances to elected a democrat that just fucks up everything
Why does it only help dems get elected? If most people wanted a conservative would they not also get 3 or 4 chances to vote for one?
Fairvote.org is working to get ranked choice too
And the winner gets a million dollar recording contract?
I'd love you to ask trump supporters who they'd put as #2 or 3. I can guarantee you they'd put him as 1 and leave the rest blank. Same with hardcore democrats. Then you'll have some independents who actually put a 2nd/3rd and others who don't. The system is a great IDEA but in practice it would never yield accurate results
DannyB Plays Tusli Gabbard as my #2 or even remove Mike Pence and have her be VP.
watching this in 2020 and it’s only gotten worse
rank choice voting is cool,but I think we should allow two canidate to be put in a same preferences
RCV is not cool and doesn't solve what's claimed. RCV entrenches the two parties (Duverger's Law). "Approval Voting" tears down the two party system. Easily, cheaply, obviously. AV eliminates "lesser of evils", "fear of wasted vote", "favorite betrayal" strategies. EC, RCV, IRV are complex distractions that don't solve the two party problem. Vote for all approved candidates, the highest count wins; Same old ballots, same counting machines. Just better. It's how you'd select restaurants, outfits, vacations, any election seeking the widest satisfaction from multiple options is "Approval Voting".
STAR voting us superior. Score Then Automatic Runoff.
ranked system is interesting.
But still too flawed. There are better options out there
How about not voting at all?
Check out STAR voting as well.
Independents are now the largest “party”
Yes, but we still have two parties. RCV doesn't solve what's claimed. RCV entrenches the two parties (Duverger's Law). "Approval Voting" tears down the two party system. Easily, cheaply, obviously. AV eliminates "lesser of evils", "fear of wasted vote", "favorite betrayal" strategies. EC, RCV, IRV are complex distractions that don't solve the two party problem. Vote for all approved candidates, the highest count wins; Same old ballots, same counting machines. Just better. It's how you'd select restaurants, outfits, vacations, any election seeking the widest satisfaction from multiple options is "Approval Voting".
Which is why we need Approval Voting. RCV also suffers from Duverger's Law (mathematically enforced Two-Party System)
But still the problem is getting your vote to count Or Keeping the parties from cheating or destroying ballots. I don't get this. I don't see it as a solution. Who came up with this idea?
Can you post this on your igtv? I'd love to share it on my Instagram story!!!
If the media would talk about third party candidates like they do about the main two candidates for 24 hours straight, maybe a third party would have a chance. To say a ranked voting system would some how make you feel better for not voting for the lesser of two evils is irrelevant. One of the lesser of two evils will end up winning.
I prefer the notion of not giving my power away via a voting system period. We all know it’s just an illusion of choice. Both sides are run by bankers which is the rich mans trick.
What about cardinal systems like approval and scored voting? You can also do balanced versions (look up balanced/combined approval). Ranked voting with 3+ canidates break the arrows impossibility theorem and as such while better than FPTP are almost as flawed
2020: lets do 2016 worse this time
Yeeep, we are screwed. If we can get Rank Choice Voting in all states before 2024 then we'd have a better chance.
How is RCV votes tallied though? How do we know what makes the vote chose my 2nd instead of 1st choice?
@Scott M "what percentage of having the vote or not would qualify as eliminated" Answer: The candidate with the LOWEST number of 1st choice votes. There is no ambiguity or unknowns with this form of elimination selection criteria. Longer answer: (Aggregate Phase) They take all of the votes and put them into 'piles' based on their top choice. (Eliminate And Re-distribute Phase) Whichever pile is the smallest gets the votes redistributed to their next choices (imagine crossing out the top choice on all of those votes). Then repeat both phases. Eventually, one of the piles will be more than 50%, at which point you stop and declare them the winner. It's quite simple and unambiguous.
@RepresentUs and what percentage of having the vote or not would qualify as eliminated. What if The first place candidate has 40% of the vote, and then everyone had as their 2nd pick a person with 60% of the vote? What if then, half of the votes for the 2nd pick, were actually the 2nd pick to people who had the 1st place person. That could create an issue of exactly what and when you would eliminate the 1st place candidate? In this example if you never eliminated the first place person, they would have 40% and the second place would have 30%. But if you decided to eliminate them the 2nd place person would then get half of those votes and they would have 60% Given what we know about how people like to game political systems, i feel like there are way to many unknowns at this point, and could end up being abused even worse than our current system.
Great question. Your 2nd choice would only be counted if your first choice candidate was eliminated!
Australia has this bois
they could really use it now with Bernie, Biden and Trump. seriously, the american election system is embarrassing
@Veg Ahimsa Yeah, CES is bankrolling our effort. I'm sure STAR is fine. It's way too complex and confusing for me to understand, so I predict voter mistrust and fear of corruption with STAR. Approval Voting lacks so many common flaws because it's binary. I predict any problems that are shown with STAR to be due to its linear nature, as numbers are naturally logarithmic.
@Alan Ivar fascinating. I'll call up my CO and Denver friends and (user test) see if they understand and their impressions. .. Are you involved with CES? It seems to me RCV is still in the public consciousness but losing ground among the intelligentsia. Approval has growing support, particularly due to its simplicity, expression, elegance, and low transition cost. However, interest in StaR seems to be growing as well. However, I don't see much head to head debate or comparisons. I wonder if you have thoughts on StaR?
@Veg Ahimsa 'We' is Denver. And we're the big one this year. Maybes are the State of Utah, Austin, St. Louis COUNTY, Oakland CA, and Seattle but unfortunately, I don't see more than 1 of their grassroots movements gettin off the ground
@Alan Ivar that's excellent! Fargo, St Louis ... where else? Who is "we"?
@Veg Ahimsa good news bro. i think we about to get it in Denver this year!
A good description, but perhaps more fair to compare to a top-two primary system. Two rounds of voting is "easier" on voters because they will focus their attention on the final two candidates for their final vote. Also, one ballot RCV risks losing your vote, if you fail to rank between the final two candidates in the runoff process, and this is more likely if there are a dozen or more choices running. If there are just 4 candidates running, RCV in one election is fine. But if there are more than 4 candidates, having a RCV primary is valuable, and you can set a threshold of viability rather than just top-2, like 20% of the vote in the primary, and all candidates above 20% deserve equal access to debates. You can also lose your vote in a 20% primary, but you'll know you only need to rank deeply enough to get ONE preference above the 20% threshold, compared to 50% threshold needed in one election to pick a winner. A RCV primary in fact takes away the need for undemocratic party primaries, and while parties can endorse a candidate, or even two candidates, an open RCV primary lets ALL voters decide who moves forward. It could be done right now (2020) for president, and we could skip these Democratic primaries and let everyone run, and 20% threshold might allow 2 or 3 diverse rivals to Trump to stay in the election and compete in a RCV general election. Unfortunately presidents have 50 state elections for the general, but the primary could be a single national vote.
This sounds great, I love Rank Choice voting, on top of that, stop gerrymandering, add term limits, and put the Anti-Corruption Act into place.
IRV also has the spoiler effect. Look it up. Technically, it fails the favorite betrayal condition. Voting for your favorite in second position can sometimes help them. That's absurd. Lookup Approval Voting.
Why don't you give a link to support your reasoning. I don't see how ranked choice voting also has a spoiler effect. Explain in some way.
Liberal, not progressive. Just because they stole that tag doesn't mean they are in any way like that. Just like conservatives should have lost that tag under Bush. BTW on the surface this does appear like a really strong helpful set up. I would need to hear other sides and weigh in on this. But yea. I agree so far that this is a very good implementation. As a Christian Conservative who is maga I would still love the push this would give other more Conservative parties. It might even lead to breaking down this two party system which is a good thing. And yes it would also equally help liberals and everyone. I think.. Again. We need to look at this but openly discuss it.
What if you like two different people of different parties or none ? To many people are screwing around with votes and the voting system ! Just vote on a piece of paper . Then at the end , that polling station will opens the box for the any one in the public to watch them count the votes . No more driving off with the votes ans counting it it a secure private room . The more eyes on the box the less chance of rigging the counts . Once they have the number they will call it into a new station and tell them and the people can see the exact count on screen from their station . Whenever the government tries to do something important to our future . They almost always cheat the public . They claim we need to make it safer or the security of the nation is why they did what they did . Then when we find out what really happened , it's been so long people don't care or forget or nobody is left alive to be held accountable . The government cannot be trusted and shouldn't be ! Especially when the freedom of the public's fund's , lives and rights could be screwed with. Who do i trust , me that's who or we the public who need to rule . When a servant have more power , privileges , money and can tell the employer what they can and cannot do , while having better life in all aspects then the people who they serve . That's a no brainer that there is a major problem .
But using what voting system?
One vote, one person. Popular vote gets the job.
Unequal. Unfair. Dangerous to the survival of families. www.equal.vote/theequalvote
I'm still Bernie or bust
thats a shame. You should research what socialism actually is and how this country has uplifted more and is still doing so.. Changing it to something horrid makes no sense.
A "conservative progressive"? ok...
@cree Cunningham right right lol
@Almumin that's like saying you are hot cold
it's called a moderate democrat lol
This is so important. Perhaps even more important than the invention of democracy itself!
And the invention of the Republic and a peoples constitution. Democracy isn't so great but has it's uses to a point.
Ranked Choice Voting is a step in the right direction, but proportional representation would be better
PR is best but RCV doesn't solve what's claimed. RCV entrenches the two parties (Duverger's Law). "Approval Voting" tears down the two party system. Easily, cheaply, obviously. AV eliminates "lesser of evils", "fear of wasted vote", "favorite betrayal" strategies. EC, RCV, IRV are complex distractions that don't solve the two party problem. Vote for all approved candidates, the highest count wins; Same old ballots, same counting machines. Just better. It's how you'd select restaurants, outfits, vacations, any election seeking the widest satisfaction from multiple options is "Approval Voting".
Take a look STAR voting also. It is similar to amazon product rating.
Both is best.
It IS the corrupt establishment don't let him kid you
But 40% of voters now consider themselves independent. So the illustration around 1 min and 45 secs is not an accurate representation of the electorate. What if there was an Independent 3rd party that could keep both existing parties honest and capture the majority of the 40% of voters who now consider themselves independent???
A bill was actually just introduced in the House to establish RCV for all Congressional elections starting in 2022! Here's a link, if you want to sign a letter to your representative showing your support! p2a.co/0KPfFSZ
Would the Anti-corruptuon act use Instant Runoff, or STV?
Why was instant runoff voting chosen as the ranked choice method? It's been proven to not select the most supported candidates when the 3rd party scores more than a token vote. There are other methods that more consistently elect a more supported candidate.
This is like a shell game. We already have proof that voter suppression, outside interference, even state interference by people like Kovach and places where polls get closed or relocated along with gerrymandering and deliberately uncounted votes can fix a vote before anyone goes to the poll. Voting machines are so unreliable it only took some school kid nerds a few minutes to change some votes. We do not live in a society where this kind of voting is safe for democracy. Let's take Michigan where 40,000 people allegedly voted for candidates up and down the list except for a president. Do you honestly think 40,000 people would not vote for a candidate when they had other options on the ballot? Let's say Stein and the Libertarian didn't get any votes. Hillary would still have lost because there was voter interference. You can easily end up with two people from the same party who can go on to control the house or senate with this system. It almost happened in CA before. You saw what happened with Trump and both houses. It's a stupid idea and a moving disaster.
But let's assume 50 of Americans vote as their first choice for president a and as second president b, and the other half the other way around. Which votes are discarded first?
Typically you flip a coin and eliminate one at random.
You can't do ranked voting with just two candidates, your question seems to imply that you didn't understand that.
I believe that RCV only kicks in with no one gets at least 50% of first choice votes. So if Candidate X receives 43% and Candidate Y receives 43%, Candidate Z receives 14%, this would be a RCV situation. If Candidate Y is the second choice of more Voters who voted for Candidate Z as their first choice, then Candidate Y is the winner. IE, if I can't have my preferred candidate, I'll settle for this one as second choice (and third, etc.) Of course, voters also have the right to ignore the second and third choices on their ballots in effect opting out of RCV. Is this correct? If so, it would seem to be quite valuable as the winner would more closely reflect voter sentiment. It would be interesting to know the margin of second choice votes by which a candidate was elected. This would certainly be something the pundits would discuss ad nauseum. With all that said, it must be admitted that a second choice is probably considered less of an evil than the non-choice(?)
Elections are only the beginning of democracy. People having a say in all the issues is democracy.. Directdemocracy.io
I agree. Although ,how? Take away the corruption that decides on issues, if that wasn't there , citizens do vote on issues. The problem is, as we see from all the division is that we don't all agree on issues. That's a reality
Scored voting is better (basics is you score your candidate from one number to the other, you can score multiple canidates the same, theirs two ways to tally, you can either add up all the scores for each candidate or you can find the average score for each candidate my preferred system is scores are 0-10 0 being not supported 10 being very very supported, then you find the average for each candidate [rounding to the nearest hundredth] and the candidate with the highest avg score wins or in the case of filling multiple seats pick the canidates one by one starting with the highest average score to the lowest average score until the seats are filled)
For multiple seats, Reweighted Range Voting (RRV) would be more democratic.
I recommend we have a government structure like the Republic of San Marino. A Constitutional Unitary diarchy parliamentary Republic. With a unicameral legislature. That consists of 500 seats. Each state gets 10 seats. The 10 seats will be divided by counties population in that state. Election should be done by single transferable vote. And they should have a five-year term with no term limits.
All positions should also have the choice, eliminate this job and associated spending.
althe.info/number/yJ_GqYxton54mrI/video Shows it's a shit idea!!!
I'm questioning this organization now. I'm wondering if we ate being manipulated. Ranked voting only strengthens the Two Party Establishment.
Sounds good to me. Let's get this implemented.
This might work but I need to research the rating/ star system and see how it compares. Another thing that might work is a multi party system. See JJ McCulloughs video for more information.
Star is better a representing people's preferences than RCV. But RCV is a start.
Anything else besides one vote is for stealing votes.
FPTP does not give an equal-weighted vote to each voter. Therefore it violates the spirit of "one person, one vote", which includes an _equal_ vote. equal.vote/theequalvote
Favorite Betrayal in Plurality and Instant Runoff Voting althe.info/number/sKescYecgoOaqbY/video
LOL... we have two options because of the fucking constitution.... and also.. THE CANDIDATE WITH THE MOST VOTES DOESNT ALWAYS WIN?! Did the author of this SEE the 2016 election? Hillary got 3,000,000 more votes. The problem is the electoral college, so THATS where the change needs to be.. but guess what has to happen before you can change that.. YOU NEED TO WIN ELECTIONS. So yeah, shut the fuck up and vote blue.
This is a nice idea, but misguided. The best voting system is the Star-Voting System. Look it up on ALthe.
I prefer S.T.A.R voting also, but the video isn't necessarily "misguided", they both perform well at their goal and both have advantages and disadvantages.
In the single-winner context, readers who have heard of ranking systems should also know that rating systems are proposed as well.
it kills your 1st vote and insures the one of the big 2 will always win
not exactly true
What happens when the person I like most is definitely eliminated and my vote goes to the back up person that I don't like but for some reason put #2? Then that person wins and I technically did vote for them. I'm genuinely asking, how does this stop the spoiler effect in a system that's already geared to elect one of two people, anyway?
You at least had a chance that you are not guilt-ridden over. It is always better to go down swinging.
Who could possibly be against this?
Because RCV doesn't solve what's claimed. RCV entrenches the two parties (Duverger's Law). "Approval Voting" tears down the two party system. Easily, cheaply, obviously. AV eliminates "lesser of evils", "fear of wasted vote", "favorite betrayal" strategies. EC, RCV, IRV are complex distractions that don't solve the two party problem. Vote for all approved candidates, the highest count wins; Same old ballots, same counting machines. Just better. It's how you'd select restaurants, outfits, vacations, any election seeking the widest satisfaction from multiple options is "Approval Voting".
@Uhohhotdog Gaming They don't care either way. Plurality and RCV are the same to them. But they know people want a new voting method, so they talk about the the "change" that will be had with RCV. Meanwhile, the results of RCV elections remain the same, the people feel like they did something, and Wall Street stays in power
@Alan Ivar 🙄 Neither one wants it or else it would already be Implemented nation wide
@Uhohhotdog Gaming Yeah, the Republicans did. They're Bad Cop, and Democrats support it because they're Good Cop. But the Chief of Police is still Wall Street, and they like the status quo and duopoly
@Alan Ivar they do. Try actually reading news. They tried overturning Ranked choice in Maine multiple times
Thank you for the link
I want to post a transcript on Facebook along with a link to this.
The video gives an example showing exhausted ballots in IRV.
"Pwogwethiveth"? What the hell. Never heard of them except in historical context 110 years ago. and they were Capitalists. Oh.... you mean SOCIALISTS.. Then why didn't you say so? Our parents and grandparents called them SOCIALISTS. So should you. There is no progress in Socialism.
the best thing about this is that they are bringing Progressives and Conservatives together.
@lagg3 sbd3 liberals as in the democrats do not nationally support this. Nor do the Conservatives/Republicans. But I think both could get on board but getting this officially past the dnc/Rnc.. hmmm good luck
@lagg3 sbd3 I'm sure that libertarians would support it
In practice it's only the progressives that support this though.
Ranked Choice Voting is unfair since it ranks the voters based on how they rank candidates. Each ballot should be treated equally, yet this system deals with the voters who chose as first the candidate who just happened to garnish the fewest votes differently than the ballots of all the other voters. In order to rank all voters equally, if a second choice is counted due to a lack of 51% then ALL ballots should reflect their second choice, not only some of them, meaning even the the last place could end up being the winner. Stick with a plurality.
Please help support the effort to make the first statewide Ranked Choice Voting in the USA a success. The Maine effort was mentioned in this video, and the politicians are not funding the Secretary of State to put on the election. www.gofundme.com/qdsdb-ranked-choice-voting-revolution
Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is also called Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting .. *Many countries use it.* I think it is a great idea. It is not a cure-all, but has _in practice_ been shown to solve the spoiler problem. *Be wary of people spreading FUD about it* and pushing other arcane options. This is a common tactic by the status quo to prevent _any_ change.. .. at least it happened when we fought to move to MMP in NZ. We just got totally sick of *safe seats* where most people's votes did not count. MMP was the change recommended by some electoral commission, but all sorts of dirty tricks were used to undermine it. This included a push for a list of other options, actually including IRV. Many of the arguments were reasonable sounding.. but when you looked at who was funding all these attacks on the MMP option, pointing out flaws that option B,C or D might fix.. *it was funded by groups we knew intended NO change.* MMP is pretty good but I suspect it is a bridge too far for US. Ranked Choice voting is simple and something you could step to state by state without change to the US constitution. It doesn't fix everything but it is a common system and you certainly don't need to be _afraid_ of it.
Our choice is between either a Douche, or a Turd Sandwich. Has South Park taught you nothing?
Duverger's Law. RCV also only allows a Two-Party System. It's just math.
IRV is a big improvement on plurality but it can produce odd results. No system is perfect but the Condorcet-Schulze method is as close to perfect as you can get when you want a single winner. But proportional voting is needed for legislatures unless you're fine with the two part duopoly.
Why continue to play this game at all? Why not outlaw ANY political party and make it a crime for politicians to collude with one another? Members of political parties vote for what is best for the party, they do not vote for what is best for the nation. Wherever political parties exist Democracy fails.
It's impossible not to have people group together by ideology, and attempting to just starts down the path to totalitarianism. Even if you make political parties illegal, there will still be groupings that are effectively political parties in all but name. No amount of legislation will change that reality of human behavior.
Because they will just vote for their donors.
This video is great right up until 2:16. "...lets you vote for any candidate you want without worrying about the spoiler effect." I think you guys need to go back and edit this video. There are a lot of reasons to support RCV if you choose to without citing false claims. It's a lot better than what we have but RCV (IRV specifically) doesn't solve the spoiler effect. It still has a major problem in elections with multiple viable candidates, exactly the scenario we are trying to create! The issue boils down to the fact that when they tally RCV ballots they don't actually count all the rankings given. If your first choice is eliminated in a later round your other rankings may be gone already. This means that the rest of your ballot is ignored. Ignoring some peoples rankings but counting other people's is unfair and can lead to unrepresentative results. There's a word for selling policy with false claims and press. Represent Us, you are the biggest national organization working on this issue. You can do better! Please make some corrections. At 2:55 it says that "If Johnson doesn't win, your vote is automatically transferred to Trump." This is ONLY true IF Johnson is eliminated BEFORE Trump. It it happens the other way around your 2nd and 3rd choice votes are discarded uncounted. Wasted! At 3:20 it says "You can vote your conscience without hurting your own interests" but this isn't always true either. In elections with 3 or more viable candidates voting honestly CAN backfire and sometimes it is best to vote lesser evil, just like we are pressured to do now. This has been documented in real world elections like the notorious Burlington, VT example that led to RCV's repeal. 3:36 "Maine just changed their statewide elections to RCV." I wish! It was voted in but found to be unconstitutional in Maine. This is being contested and it's yet to be implemented. I hope that Maine does listen to it's voters, but I also hope that those voters aren't supporting RCV based on the false claims above.
I think it makes sense that first choice votes matter more than second choice votes