- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Ranked Choice Voting
Posted on 11/11/23 at 4:36 pm
Posted on 11/11/23 at 4:36 pm
LINK
I have a buddy that checked out during college. Moved to the Pacific NW and joined a traveling circus. Seriously.
Anyway, dude was out rallying for this. I’d never heard of it before and have just started reading a bit about it. I understand the theory, just not sure on the practice. What do the Poli Sci scholars of TD think?
I have a buddy that checked out during college. Moved to the Pacific NW and joined a traveling circus. Seriously.
Anyway, dude was out rallying for this. I’d never heard of it before and have just started reading a bit about it. I understand the theory, just not sure on the practice. What do the Poli Sci scholars of TD think?
23
Posted on 11/11/23 at 4:40 pm to Aubie Spr96
its been a pile of poop in Alaska
Posted on 11/11/23 at 4:41 pm to Aubie Spr96
It is absolutely horrible. Pretty damned obvious as to why!!
Posted on 11/11/23 at 4:59 pm to Timeoday
quote:
Pretty damned obvious as to why!!
Help me out. That’s why I posted this.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 5:06 pm to Aubie Spr96
I have a friend that claims to be a good government fiscal hawk, that is a huge supporter of ranked choice voting. He also voted for Biden and hates Trump because he does not like what Trump does with his own money. Needles to say my friend is a loon.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 5:20 pm to Aubie Spr96
It is trash, but only if you fill it out.
It presumes you would vote for 2 or 3 in a runoff.
It presumes you would vote for 2 or 3 in a runoff.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 5:23 pm to Aubie Spr96
I fully support a none of the above option on all ballots.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 5:34 pm to Aubie Spr96
Worst idea ever.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 5:47 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
dude was out rallying for this.
IF people would do it in absolute seriousness, it may be ok.
But none of us are saints - it would be too easy to game the system - especially when one of the 2 major candidates have zero integrity.
THe only side that would have any significant 'real ranking' would be whatever the conservative side was called - they may put the 'other' major candidate somewhere other than last.
ALL of the 'progressive' side would put the conservative side last - and that would make it worse than what we have now.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 6:06 pm to Aubie Spr96
It depends too much on technology to execute on a large scale.
Our election systems need to be able to be run without electricity.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 6:46 pm to Aubie Spr96
It violates the principle of one man one vote and makes the election process entirely dependent on machines.
So no
So no
Posted on 11/11/23 at 7:26 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:It tends to result in fewer extreme candidates being elected.
Ranked Choice Voting ... I’d never heard of it before and have just started reading a bit about it. I understand the theory, just not sure on the practice. What do the Poli Sci scholars of TD think?
Some see that as a "bad thing."
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:04 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
Ranked Choice Voting
You know how we know that it's bad for America??...because Soros spends a lot of money supporting orgs that are trying to get this pushed thru. I think even some towns/cities in Kansas have this process.
This post was edited on 11/11/23 at 9:07 pm
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:16 pm to Aubie Spr96
It is apparently too confusing for most people to understand.
A ranked choice vote should be thought of as instructions for how to vote in a series of elections where only one candidate is eliminated in each election. Overall results in more "moderate" candidates being elected than winner-takes-all or a jungle primary.
A ranked choice vote should be thought of as instructions for how to vote in a series of elections where only one candidate is eliminated in each election. Overall results in more "moderate" candidates being elected than winner-takes-all or a jungle primary.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:18 pm to Aubie Spr96
It typically creates more moderation, so it's hated on here.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:19 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
It depends too much on technology to execute on a large scale.
Our election systems need to be able to be run without electricity.
Why couldn't it work with pen/paper?
I can write 1. 2. 3. on a card
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:25 pm to Aubie Spr96
Here's the situation: It's a jungle primary so everyone's on the ballot. It's in a state that is historically Republican (Alaska for instance). The Democrats have just 1 person on the ballot, but Republicans have 2.
One of the Republicans is very conservative, but the other one isn't. No one wins a majority of the vote. The Republican vote is split, and the conservative Republican gets the majority of the registered Republican vote. However the more middle of the road Republican gets so many second choice votes from the Democrats that they win since no one won a majority of the total votes.
If they had closed primaries and forced a vote between 1 of the 2 sides, the conference candidate would stand a better chance of winning since a state like Alaska is not likely to elect a Republican.
I'm glad Louisiana doesn't have ranked choice voting, but I wish we would implement closed primaries.
One of the Republicans is very conservative, but the other one isn't. No one wins a majority of the vote. The Republican vote is split, and the conservative Republican gets the majority of the registered Republican vote. However the more middle of the road Republican gets so many second choice votes from the Democrats that they win since no one won a majority of the total votes.
If they had closed primaries and forced a vote between 1 of the 2 sides, the conference candidate would stand a better chance of winning since a state like Alaska is not likely to elect a Republican.
I'm glad Louisiana doesn't have ranked choice voting, but I wish we would implement closed primaries.
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:37 pm to Aubie Spr96
The main beef I see is requires two factors
* 1 party running a lot of candidates and the other runs only one
* voters who select one from the many candidates not filling out choices beyond their first selection
This can wind up with the solo candidate for the other party winning when they shouldn’t have. Ofc if voters would, you know, fill out the ballot it would work. Also has potential for letting in third party candidates and prevent them from executing the Ross Perot maneuver.
* 1 party running a lot of candidates and the other runs only one
* voters who select one from the many candidates not filling out choices beyond their first selection
This can wind up with the solo candidate for the other party winning when they shouldn’t have. Ofc if voters would, you know, fill out the ballot it would work. Also has potential for letting in third party candidates and prevent them from executing the Ross Perot maneuver.
This post was edited on 11/11/23 at 9:48 pm
Posted on 11/11/23 at 8:59 pm to Witty_Username
Yep, OP understands it as well but is just looking for attention.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News