Choice Ranked Voting

Post Reply New Topic

So I got home from Walmart today doing some light shopping.
Sitting in my mailbox was a pamphlet
It said;Vote yes on question 2

Question 2 is a ballot initiative,you know where citizens can create there own laws.The same way marijuana was legalized in my state two years ago.

What is question 2? Ranked choice voting.

It means that instead of simply voting for one candidate,you can pick in order which candidates you like in order.

So in essence you vote for every candidate but in order of your choice.You still retain the option to just vote for one as well,you may rank as many or as few as you like.

If your top choice can't win ,your vote instantly counts for you second choice,if needed a third choice etc....

So a vote is never wasted.

I had never heard of this before 35 minutes ago,does anyone life in a American state or other country or jurisdiction that used choice ranked voting.

I'm sure yet how I even feel about this

It helps the two party system.

By re-routing third party (can't win) votes to major candidates.

A vote is never wasted unless it is never made.

Voting is not about guessing who will win; it is about choosing whom you want to win.

Choice-Rank Voting is a method in which 3rd and 4th party candidates see a way to legitimize themselves.

Nothing more.

Does your state have it.

I guess it's good for state,local, congress and senate but not the president.

I never heard of this but think it has potential.

I believe Maine is using it for the first time ever in a Presidential election this year.

I can't be used for president but Maine might be using for state,local, congress and US senate.
At least in Massachusetts it's can't be used for the president.I imagine that's a Federal restriction and apply's to all states.

This is the same system that the UK unfortunately rejected in 2011 on the grounds that it was less important than a bullet-proof vest. We called it Alternative Vote.

We use a similar system, but with only two choices, for London Mayor and possibly other mayoral elections. This is actually designed to maintain the two-party system which is why those parties allowed it but I do prefer it to FPTP - it means I can safely vote for my first choice, Munira Wilson (Lib Dem), without fear of costing Sadiq Khan (Labour) his place to Shaun Bailey (Conservative). But if Rory Stewart (ex-Conservative Independent) was running, I’d prefer him to Khan... but wouldn’t be able to give him an option, as we only get two choices.

The Labour Party here is softly in favour of AV (RCV) but aren’t prepared to put in any work in for it, but the Conservatives are staunchly opposed. This arguably cost them their majority in the 2017 election and ultimately cost Theresa May her job. You’re lucky in the US that the Democrats are a bit more open to voting reform, particularly at the state level.

RCV (AV) is a definite improvement on the status quo, and so one I would support - but it is slightly worse than scored voting and much worse than proportional systems.

A proportional system would:

- end gerrymandering
- stop popular vote winners from losing
- make everyone’s vote count equally
- end, or at least greatly reduce, wasted votes
- make it possible for smaller parties to gain representation if they can get above a threshold (e.g. 5%)

But if the choice is RCV or unranked FPTP - RCV every time

Presidential Election in Maine

^^^
I think I'll vote for it,I think it's a good plan.

In our state it can not be used for president,not sure why if Maine is allowed to and us not.Or why Mass would choose not to use it for president,which ever applies.

As will I.

How are you going to vote in the "right to repair" question

I personally would rather have choice of repairs shops than be paranoid about stalkers hacking a car computer.

To be honest I don't know anything about that issue, although based on what you're saying here, I think I agree with you that I'd rather have the choice.

I think the law applies to cars 2022 and newer,my 2004 would not be affected.

People say that the complex computers that newer cars have are vulnerable to hackers.There could be forced accidents or stalker's could track you by your car.
They want to make it so only dealers can access the computer.

And this would phase small time repair shops and force people to dealers.

I don't feel the paranoia is worth the sacrifice.

It would take 10 years to put every small time garage out of business because it's only for 2022 model year and newer which are not even out yet.

In say 15 years I could be forced to the Subaru dealer in Pittsfield and that would be a huge inconvenience.

Neither of my vehicles would be affected, but eventually I'd be replacing them. I like my little auto repair shop in town (one of the only businesses we have). I would hate to see them forced out of business.

I read about the issue a little more and the NO VOTE people are from anti-domestic violence groups who claim stalkers can hack you location but the anti-right to repair people don't really specify how allowing small repair shops access to car computers will make your car more hackable.They don't make a detailed argument,they just say dealer only access is safer but don't say why.

I don't know how these 2022 car computers will work,where it's repaired should not effect hackability.Hackers could hack your smart phone with or without you even being in a car,they could hack your desktop,laptop and tablets,what do cars really even have to do with this anyway.