Election Reform and the Spoiler Effect

[dblack]

Uh, guy, we've had the Two-parties for 180 years.

180 years too long.

Do you really want me to list the third parties that came and went since 1860?

Then why are you so worried about them?

 

[JoeB131]

180 years too long.

Then why are you so worried about them?

I worry that we could have a repeat of 2016, where so many people pissed away their votes on third parties and we got stuck with the never ending Trump nightmare.

 

[dblack]

I worry that we could have a repeat of 2016, where so many people pissed away their votes on third parties and we got stuck with the never ending Trump nightmare.

LOL - RCV does away with that concern! Have you been paying NO attention? That's the entire point of the reform. It makes it so third parties don't cause a spoiler effect. Nader won't steal votes from Gore. Libertarians and Greens can vote for the candidates they prefer, but still have a say in whether Trump or Clinton are elected.

It honestly sounds like you simply don't understand how it works. Which is usually the case with partisan opposition.

 

[JoeB131]

LOL - RCV does away with that concern! Have you been paying NO attention? That's the entire point of the reform. It makes it so third parties don't cause a spoiler effect. Nader won't steal votes from Gore. Libertarians and Greens can vote for the candidates they prefer, but still have a say in whether Trump or Clinton are elected.

It honestly sounds like you simply don't understand how it works. Which is usually the case with partisan opposition.

I understand how it works just fine..

It doesn't. It's an awful clusterfuck of a system, which is why places that adopted it are getting rid of it.

 

[dblack]

I understand how it works just fine..

If you weren't aware that it does away with the spoiler effect, then you clearly don't.

 

[JoeB131]

If you weren't aware that it does away with the spoiler effect, then you clearly don't.

Actually, judging by Alaska, it made the effect worse.

 

[dblack]

Actually, judging by Alaska, it made the effect worse.

Alright. You've clearly moved into the "deliberately specious" portion of your trolling, so I'll leave you to jerkoff in private.

"Or you can just have the intellectual honesty to admit that" RCV does, by it's very design, eliminate the spoiler effect. But I think we both know that ship has already sailed.

 

[JoeB131]

Alright. You've clearly moved into the "deliberately specious" portion of your trolling, so I'll leave you to jerkoff in private.

"Or you can just have the intellectual honesty to admit that" RCV does, by it's very design, eliminate the spoiler effect. But I think we both know that ship has already sailed.

except it doesn't. It just adds confusion and undermines the primary process.

 

[dblack]

except it doesn't. It just adds confusion and undermines the primary process.

sailed

 

[JoeB131]

sailed

Yes, the ship on Ranked Clusterfuck Voting has sailed, as people have rejected it in AK, NE, NV, ID, and CO.

 

[dblack]

Yes, the ship on Ranked Clusterfuck Voting has sailed, as people have rejected it in AK, NE, NV, ID, and CO.

Joe, you're nothing but a lying partisan drone. The truth is no more important to you than it is to Trump. Enjoy the next four years of the government you chose.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, you're nothing but a lying partisan drone. The truth is no more important to you than it is to Trump. Enjoy the next four years of the government you chose.

Guy, I pointed out the obvious. RCV was rejected everywhere it was put on the ballot, including places that foolishly tried it and regretted it later.

But I'm sure you'll babble it was because the two parties conspired to destroy it.

 

[dblack]

Guy, I pointed out the obvious. RCV was rejected everywhere it was put on the ballot, including places that foolishly tried it and regretted it later.

But I'm sure you'll babble it was because the two parties conspired to destroy it.

No, I'm done with your bullshit. Intellectual dishonesty doesn't warrant a response.

 

[JoeB131]

No, I'm done with your bullshit. Intellectual dishonesty doesn't warrant a response.

Except you aren't intellectually honest enough to admit that voters are rejected this scheme as too complicated. Or that big money was being spent by the Plutocrats to implement this shit.

Instead you are blaming the two parties.

Alaska Ballot Measure 2, Repeal Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)

Alaska - 51 Yes, 49 No. Repeals RCV

Alaskans for Honest Elections and Yes on 2 were leading the campaign in support of the initiative. With campaign finance reports through October 4, 2024, the campaigns reported $489,888.14 in contributions. The Ranked Choice Education Association was the largest donor, contributing $152,000.[3]

Alaskans for Better Elections and No on 2 were leading the campaign in opposition to the initiative. With campaign finance reports through August 10, 2024, the campaigns reported $12.9 million in contributions. The largest donors included Article IV, which contributed $4.42 million, and Unite America PAC, which contributed $4.1 million.[3]

Seems the voters said "NO" to big money. Big money had a 26 to 1 advantage over those opposing the scheme, and it still lost.


Colorado - Prop 131 .

Yes - 54% No 46

Colorado Proposition 131, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Idaho Prop 1

Defeated 70 - 30%

Idaho Proposition 1, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Nevada Question 3-

Nevada Question 3, Top-Five Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Yes- 46%, No, 54%

13 Million were spent in favor of this, while the opposition only spent 2 Million.

Arizona - Prop 140 and Prop 133

Arizona Proposition 140, Single Primary for All Candidates and Possible RCV General Election Initiative (2024)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Prop 140 lost 59- 41

Prop 133 lost 58-42

This one is sweet. the people pushing this had a 100- 1 advantage in cash- AND STILL LOST>

Such measures also went downto defeat in OR, MT, and SD. Now, if you really want to keep playing, I can identify how big money backed this crap there, too, and still lost.

The only place it did well was in DC, where they spent 1.3 Million compared to only $5723 opposing it.

My guess. One experience with this clusterfuck, and the voters of DC will reject it, too.

 

[dblack]

Except you aren't intellectually honest enough to admit ...

LOL - now that's rich.

You run with that two-party system you love so much. It's working really well.

 

[JoeB131]

LOL - now that's rich.

You run with that two-party system you love so much. It's working really well.

So you can't answer the question- or won't.

Why are so many monied interests spending so much shoving this crap down the throats of the voters?

when rich people want something this bad, I have to honestly wonder why.

 

[dblack]

So you can't answer the question- or won't.

Go fuck yourself.

 

[JoeB131]

Go fuck yourself.

Man, I get it. It's hard to admit you are being played by rich people.

So we'll ask the question again- why are so many rich people invested in shoving this down the voters' throats?

 

[dblack]

Man, I get it. It's hard to admit you are being played by rich people.

Joe, watching you and your Republican buddies squash the only positive reform effort I've seen in forty years is just kind of hard to take. So jerk off to your pictures of President Trump. You win. The two party system will prevail. The country, who knows?

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, watching you and your Republican buddies squash the only positive reform effort I've seen in forty years is just kind of hard to take. So jerk off to your pictures of President Trump. You win. The two party system will prevail. The country, who knows?

Guy, it wasn't a positive reform effort.

It was a confusing mess, funded by dark money.

So, answer the question, why was the Billionaire Class so invested in this scheme?