I’m a huge fan of ranked choice. I’m a little nervous about it, though… from what I understand it IS possible to game the system so that the candidate at the very bottom of everyone’s list is the one that wins. I’d like assurances that we can limit that. MORE importantly, we MUST stop this No means Yes, clouding issues and outright lying about WHERE the issues are apply… the lie that water in the north would be diverted to the south continues to haunt voting habits and party allegiance. It’s b.s. and we can no longer afford disruptive TRICKERY to influence anything at all. TRANSPARENCY is where this needs to go NOW. California leads, lets make sure we know where WE are going and where we are being lead.
Citizens United has to go
This wretched decision has silenced the voices of all but the stupidly rich and greedy donors....
RCV I appreciate as it seems to bring in more moderate voices. Also, multi-member districts also seems to be a way to reduce Jerrymandering and create more competitive seats. I’m interested in trying those on a local/state level to see how they could succeed at a national level.
As far as I understand RCV: The candidate at the bottom of everybody’s list doesn’t have any chance of winning. Without any first-place votes, they’d be eliminated in the first round.
Regardless, it’s better than what we have now.
Ranked Choice voting makes sense. Let’s see how quickly we can educate the average citizen about the issue.
Multimember voting is less straight forward but I hope we can get some relief from bi-partisanship through this system