Maine Becomes First State To Try Ranked-Choice Voting for President

[OKTexas]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

.

 

[dblack]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

Voting isn't placing a bet. The point isn't to "pick a winner".

In any case, your claim that ranked-choice voting violates "one person, one vote" simply isn't true.

 

[easyt65]

Any deviation from '1 person 1 vote' is just another attempt to rig / steal elections.

 

[dblack]

Any deviation from '1 person 1 vote' is just another attempt to rig / steal elections.

Ranked choice voting isn't a deviation from that, so we're good.

 

[FA_Q2]

The inability to understand something so simple is a perfect reflection of why our political system is so fucked in the first place.

Ranked choice voting is a far superiors system to what we have now. It would be amazing to see it spread to every state.

 

[dblack]

The inability to understand something so simple is a perfect reflection of why our political system is so fucked in the first place.

Ranked choice voting is a far superiors system to what we have now. It would be amazing to see it spread to every state.

I don't think those opposing it have made any genuine effort to understand it. Which is reflected in their assumption that it's a partisan ploy.

 

[OKTexas]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

Voting isn't placing a bet. The point isn't to "pick a winner".

In any case, your claim that ranked-choice voting violates "one person, one vote" simply isn't true.

Bullshit, if you can't pick a winner the first time, as it should be, you get a second, third and maybe a fourth chance.

.

 

[easyt65]

Any deviation from '1 person 1 vote' is just another attempt to rig / steal elections.

Ranked choice voting isn't a deviation from that, so we're good.

How so? You don't vote for 1 candidate - you rank numerous candidates. Your statement is seriously flawed / in error.

Nobody should give a shit who your #2 is. The only thing that matters is who do you want to be President.

 

[dblack]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

Voting isn't placing a bet. The point isn't to "pick a winner".

In any case, your claim that ranked-choice voting violates "one person, one vote" simply isn't true.

Bullshit, if you can't pick a winner the first time, as it should be, you get a second, third and maybe a fourth chance.

LOL - that's not the way it works. There are valid criticisms of ranked-choice voting, but that ain't one.

 

[BS Filter]

What the election rigging fuck??

No rigging.
It's a standard voting method around The World.

Single transferable vote - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So? Should we drink water out of a puddle where cows piss and shit just because people in third world shitholes do?

 

[dblack]

Any deviation from '1 person 1 vote' is just another attempt to rig / steal elections.

Ranked choice voting isn't a deviation from that, so we're good.

How so? You don't vote for 1 candidate - you rank numerous candidates. Your statement is seriously flawed / in error.

Nobody should give a shit who your #2 is. The only thing that matters is who do you want to be President.

You get one vote. And you rank all the candidates to determine who gets your one vote.

Seriously, if you're going to criticize, at least understand how it works for. Or, just listen to the demagogues and repeat their horseshit. Your call.

 

[easyt65]

I don't think those opposing it have made any genuine effort to understand it. Which is reflected in their assumption that it's a partisan ploy.

Is the concept of '1 person 1 vote' too complicated for Democrats / snowflakes to understand?

This election isn't an a la carte menu at your favorite local restaurant, no '1 from column 'A', 1 from column 'B', etc.... It's 'pick 1 f*ing name'. If you can't understand that, if you can't do that, then you probably shouldn't be voting to begin with.

The only reason to try to make it more difficult is to attempt to steal the election. Picking 1 name could not be any easier, even for Democrats / snowflakes.

 

[OKTexas]

The inability to understand something so simple is a perfect reflection of why our political system is so fucked in the first place.

Ranked choice voting is a far superiors system to what we have now. It would be amazing to see it spread to every state.

It's a system for the simple minded that can't stay with a candidate and their enablers.

.

 

[easyt65]

You get one vote. And you rank all the candidates to determine who gets your one vote.

Again, nothing matters except the 1 (ONE) person you choose as your pick for President. There is no need to waste time ranking everyone else. #s 2 through the rest are 1st LOSERS - who cares. If you want to go through the insignificant process of ranking the others go for it, but - again - no one gives a shit because the ranking does not matter.

The reason for this ranking, IMO, is for when there is a tie and the decision of wins goes to Pelosi who then picks 'Option 2' - Biden - for the 'steal'.

 

[FA_Q2]

The inability to understand something so simple is a perfect reflection of why our political system is so fucked in the first place.

Ranked choice voting is a far superiors system to what we have now. It would be amazing to see it spread to every state.

It's a system for the simple minded that can't stay with a candidate and their enablers.

.

On the contrary - the current system is for the weak minded that cant get beyond 'my team' and continually is forced to vote for people they do not support out of fear that the worse candidate might win.

Interesting that the same people complaining that ranked choice voting is somehow a bad thing are the people demanding that those voting for libertarians are putting democrats into office because it costs the republican those votes.

Which is it?

 

[dblack]

You get one vote. And you rank all the candidates to determine who gets your one vote.

Again, nothing matters except the 1 (ONE) person you choose as your pick for President. There is no need to waste time ranking everyone else. #s 2 through the rest are 1st LOSERS - who cares. If you want to go through the insignificant process of ranking the others go for it, but - again - no one gives a shit because the ranking does not matter.

The reason for this ranking, IMO, is for when there is a tie and the decision of wins goes to Pelosi who then picks 'Option 2' - Biden - for the 'steal'.

Your O is malfunctioning. You're criticizing something you clearly don't understand.

Seriously, have you made ANY effort to understand how ranked choice voting works, or are you just parroting objections you've heard from others?

 

[easyt65]

Your O is malfunctioning. You're criticizing something you clearly don't understand.

Then explain to me why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

 

[dblack]

Your O is malfunctioning. You're criticizing something you clearly don't understand.

Then explain to me why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

This explains it thoroughly: Ranked-choice voting (RCV) - Ballotpedia

Here's a vid:

The main thing - this won't change a thing about D vs R. If you rank Trump above Biden, your vote will go to Trump. And vice versa.

 

[easyt65]

This explains it thoroughly: Ranked-choice voting (RCV) - Ballotpedia

I didn't ask for a link. Since you are such an expert I asked YOU to explain why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

 

[dblack]

This explains it thoroughly: Ranked-choice voting (RCV) - Ballotpedia

I didn't ask for a link. Since you are such an expert I asked YOU to explain why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

I'm not going to educate your lazy, ignorant ass. Do it yourself. Or, remain ignorant and make a fool out of yourself with criticisms that make exactly no sense.