Election Reform and the Spoiler Effect

[para bellum]

That's not true. Here's the breakdown:

Of the 64,392 Begich voters, 7,460 ranked Peltola above Palin. When faced with Palin as the Republican choice, they switched parties and voted for Peltola. That's why Palin lost.

That's just how RCV allowed the dem to win. The repub votes in the first round would have defeated her if there was only one GOP candidate.

You don't know the 7,460 came from Begich, there are over 14K "inactives" from that round.

 

[para bellum]

Ah. So your issue is that Republicans can’t understand simple instructions.

“Put a 1 next to your favorite candidate. Put a 2 next to your second favorite candidate.”

What do you think? Too complicated?

I don't like it because it's unnecessarily complicated.

You and dblack can go make your sales pitches to someone else.

 

[dblack]

That's just how RCV allowed the dem to win. The repub votes in the first round would have defeated her if there was only one GOP candidate.

Only if you assume that all of the Begich voters would have voted Republican if Palin were the candidate. Their rankings prove otherwise.

You don't know the 7,460 came from Begich,

Yes. You do. Begich was the only candidate eliminated in that round.

there are over 14K "inactives" from that round.

That has no bearing on the Begich votes and who their second choice was. The fact is 7460 of them preferred Peltola over Palin. And that was enough to give Peltola a majority, and the win.

 

[dblack]

I don't like it because it's unnecessarily complicated.

You and dblack can go make your sales pitches to someone else.

 

[Independent thinker]

How? Why do you say that would that happen?

So what? No one said it would. But it would give us an accurate read on how many voters preferred those candidates. As it is, we have no idea how much support they really have because voters are afraid to vote for them.

You don't seem to understand what lesser-of-two-evils is all about. It's the scare tactic that the two parties used to get people to limit their choice to only the top two parties. "If you don't vote for Harris, Trump will win!!!" or "If you don't vote for Trump, Harris will win!!!" That nonsense goes away under RCV and people can express their preferences honestly. And yes, that IS progress.

Please look up for my response to xylophone. I shouldn't have to repeat everything.

 

[dblack]

Please look up for my response to xylophone. I shouldn't have to repeat everything.

There's nothing to repeat. You didn't explain it there either. How does RCV promote one-party rule?

 

[para bellum]

Yes. You do. Begich was the only candidate eliminated in that round.

So? Maybe some of those 7460 came from a candidate that was eliminated previously. The counts are already aggregates at that point.

That has no bearing on the Begich votes and who their second choice was. The fact is 7460 of them preferred Peltola over Palin. And that was enough to give Peltola a majority, and the win.

So the voters for the third place candidate decided the election by their second choice picks.

Hardly the "will of the people".

Fuck that system.

 

[XponentialChaos]

As I said with my example, states would soon all fall into one party rule. There would be no purple states, no states with one Republican senator and one Democrat senator…

Why is that? If the top ranked Senate candidate in one election is a Democrat, and the top ranked Senate candidate in the next election is a Republican, then that’s exactly what will happen. How is that any different from what we have now?

Even if you wanted to fantasize a little, in this election we would have a choice of six different persons to be president and ALL would be the lesser of six evils. Is that really progress?

How is it not?

 

[dblack]

So? Maybe some of those 7460 came from a candidate that was eliminated previously.

So the voters for the third place candidate decided the election by their second choice picks.

Yes. Unlike our current system, their votes weren't just tossed aside.

Hardly the "will of the people".

Fuck that system.

It's exactly what would happen with runoffs, which you claimed to support. Make up your mind.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I don't like it because it's unnecessarily complicated.

“Put a 1 next to your favorite candidate. Put a 2 next to your second favorite candidate.”

This is too complicated???!!

We expect voters to read through propositions but you think it’s too complicated for them to rank their favorite candidates???

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Ok. So what if Republicans put up two candidates as well then? “Problem” solved, right?

Your issue seems to stem from having only two candidates in the general election. Put 3 of them in then. Hell, put 5 of them on the ballot. The top 5 are ranked and voted on. Winner earns the Senate seat.

What’s the issue? How is this one-party rule?

You truly are mentally challenged

 

[Independent thinker]

There's nothing to repeat. You didn't explain it there either. How does RCV promote one-party rule?

I explained it. You just refuse to listen. In fact, I provided you three links a long time ago and you refuse to listen to them either. You are a fact denier.

 

[Independent thinker]

Why is that? If the top ranked Senate candidate in one election is a Democrat, and the top ranked Senate candidate in the next election is a Republican, then that’s exactly what will happen. How is that any different from what we have now?


How is it not?

You refuse to understand. I can't explain it any simpler.

 

[Oddball]

That's just how RCV allowed the dem to win. The repub votes in the first round would have defeated her if there was only one GOP candidate.

You don't know the 7,460 came from Begich, there are over 14K "inactives" from that round.

He doesn't GAF about the results....He's a rigged choice cultist.

 

[dblack]

I explained it. You just refuse to listen. In fact, I provided you three links a long time ago and you refuse to listen to them either. You are a fact denier.

What fact am I denying? You're simply making claims without supporting them. The articles you posted had nothing to say about this "single party rule" thing you keep repeating. How does RCV promote single party rule? That answer you're avoiding is: it doesn't.

 

[para bellum]

Yes. Unlike our current system, their votes weren't just tossed aside.

It's exactly what would happen with runoffs, which you claimed to support. Make up your mind.

I don't need runoffs, I already said. I am fine with pluralities, provided the primary leaves one candidate per party for the general.

If a State needs a majority vote, a runoff is a simple and understandable way to settle the question.

Go sell your snake oil elsewhere- I'm not in the market.

 

[Oddball]

That's just how RCV allowed the dem to win. The repub votes in the first round would have defeated her if there was only one GOP candidate.

You don't know the 7,460 came from Begich, there are over 14K "inactives" from that round.

One person, 1.78251957034 votes!

 

[XponentialChaos]

You refuse to understand. I can't explain it any simpler.

It’s really not that complicated.

If the preferred candidate in one election is a Democrat, and the preferred candidate in the next election is a Republican, then a Democrat and Republican will split the Senate in that state.

That would be the case regardless of how we vote, whether we use ranked-choice voting or not.

 

[para bellum]

“Put a 1 next to your favorite candidate. Put a 2 next to your second favorite candidate.”

This is too complicated???!!

We expect voters to read through propositions but you think it’s too complicated for them to rank their favorite candidates???

The whole scheme is designed to assign third party ballots to one of the major party candidates, and thereby eliminate the spoiler effect.

As often as not, the declared winner would not have won a straight-up vote between the last two remaining candidates.

 

[Oddball]

The whole scheme is designed to assign third party ballots to one of the major party candidates, and thereby eliminate the spoiler effect.

As often as not, the declared winner would not have won a straight-up vote between the two remaining candidates.

The whole scheme is to keep ruling class scum in general, and leftists in particular, in power.

If it weren't, then dirtballs like Murkowski wouldn't push it so hard.