DEMOCRAT takes SEAT HELD BY GOP for the LAST 50 YEARS

Author: oromagi

Posts

Total: 115
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Yes I understand this, but what I believe many did not understand was that if they only put a number 1 choice they were splitting the vote.
only if their first choice received the least total votes

it's a special election, so, no "primary" to narrow the field

without RCV, there would have to be at least one "run-off" election in addition to the original election
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
I am sure a lot of voters left the number 2 and 3 choice blank because they didn't understand how it works. (33%)

Hard lesson for the voters, but now they know to pick 2 and 3, or their vote may not count.
THIS ONLY MATTERS IF THEY VOTE FOR LAST PLACE
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
only if their first choice received the least total votes
That does not follow. Elimination is based on first preference votes which allows this nonsense:


So for the sake of argument lets say that in round 1:

58,973 people put ONLY Palin.
53,810 people put Begich as 1st,
          27,053 of those put Palin as 2nd,
          15,467 of those put Peltola as 2nd
75,799 people put ONLY Peltola

Then Begich is eliminated and we see the result that happened in round 2.

If 58,973 people put Palin as 1st and Begich as 2nd with the same distribution for rest:

58,973 people put Palin as 1st,
         58,973 of those put Begich as 2nd.
53,810 people put Begich as 1st,
          27,053 of those put Palin as 2nd,
          15,467 of those put Peltola as 2nd
75,799 people put ONLY Peltola

Then the exact same thing would happen in round 2 just because of the elimination based on first choice, that's not good.

There is a solution here that makes more people happy, namely 58,973 + 53,810 = 112,783 for Begich. People shouldn't have to be guessing who will be eliminated so that they can choose the correct order of candidates to make sure that someone they find acceptable gets in.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That does not follow. Elimination is based on first preference votes which allows this nonsense:
in a race with only two contestants, RCV changes NOTHING

in a race with more than two contestants, RCV changes NOTHING if and only if any of the contestants receives 51% of the vote

in a race with more than two contestants, RCV simply eliminates the need for a "run-off" or in some cases, multiple "run-off" elections

this saves everyone the hassle of driving out to the polls AGAIN and re-voting on the same contestants twice or even three times

for example,

a bear, a fox, a snake, and a mouse are running for county commissioner in your district

the bear gets 48% of the "first choice" vote

the fox gets 47% of the "first choice" vote

the snake gets 3% of the "first choice" vote

the mouse gets 2% of the "first choice" vote

ok

ONLY THE MOUSE VOTES SWITCH TO "SECOND CHOICE"

then the totals are recalculated (easy and automatic and basically instantaneous)

and if all of the mouse voters put bear as their "SECOND CHOICE" then, bear has 50% of the vote (but that's still not a win)

So, next

ONLY THE SNAKE VOTES SWITCH TO "SECOND CHOICE"

then the totals are recalculated (easy and automatic and basically instantaneous)

and if 33% of the SNAKE voters put bear as their "SECOND CHOICE" then, bear has 51% of the vote (and that's a win)
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
I like ranked choice voting. Ross Perot would have been the greatest president of all time and ranked choice would have given him the win
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@oromagi
PELTOLA BEATS PALIN
By BECKY BOHRER
September 1, 2022

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Democrat Mary Peltola won the special election for Alaska’s only U.S. House seat on Wednesday, besting a field that included Republican Sarah Palin, who was seeking a political comeback in the state where she was once governor.

Peltola, who is Yup’ik and turned 49 on Wednesday, will become the first Alaska Native to serve in the House and the first woman to hold the seat. She will serve the remaining months of the late Republican U.S. Rep. Don Young’s term. Young held the seat for 49 years before his death in March.

“I don’t think there will be another birthday like today,” Peltola said.

“Really I’m just so grateful to Alaskans and all the Alaskans who put their faith in me to fill out the remainder of Congressman Young’s term,” she said in an interview. “My desire is to follow in Congressman Young’s legacy of representing all Alaskans, and I’m just looking forward to getting to work.”

Peltola’s victory, in Alaska’s first statewide ranked choice voting election, is a boon for Democrats, particularly coming off better-than-expected performances in special elections around the country this year following the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade. She will be the first Democrat to hold the seat since the late U.S. Rep. Nick Begich, who was seeking reelection in 1972 when his plane disappeared. Begich was later declared dead and Young in 1973 was elected to the seat.

Peltola ran as a coalition builder while her two Republican opponents — Palin and Begich’s grandson, also named Nick Begich — at times went after each other. Palin also railed against the ranked voting system, which was instituted by Alaska voters.
All three - Peltola, Palin and Begich - are candidates in the November general election, seeking a two-year term that would start in January.
The results came 15 days after the Aug. 16 election, in line with the deadline for state elections officials to receive absentee ballots mailed from outside the U.S. Ranked choice tabulations took place Wednesday after no candidate won more than 50% of the first choice votes, with state elections officials livestreaming the event. Peltola was in the lead heading into the tabulations, followed by Palin and then Begich.



State elections officials plan to certify the election by Friday.
Alaska Democratic Party leaders cheered Peltola’s win.

“Alaskans have made clear they want a rational, steadfast, honest and caring voice speaking for them in Washington D.C., not opportunists and extremists associated with the Alaska Republican Party,” state Democratic party chair Michael Wenstrup said in a statement.

Wednesday’s results were a disappointment for Palin, who was looking to make a political comeback 14 years after she was vaulted onto the national stage when John McCain selected her to be his running mate in the 2008 presidential election. In her run for the House seat, she had widespread name recognition and won the endorsement of former President Donald Trump.

After Peltola’s victory was announced, Palin called the ranked voting system “crazy, convoluted, confusing.”

“Though we’re disappointed in this outcome, Alaskans know I’m the last one who’ll ever retreat,” Palin said in a statement.

Begich in a statement congratulated Peltola while looking forward to the November election.

During the campaign, critics questioned Palin’s commitment to Alaska, citing her decision to resign as governor in July 2009, partway through her term. Palin went on to become a conservative commentator on TV and appeared in reality television programs, among other pursuits.

Palin has insisted her commitment to Alaska never wavered and said ahead of the special election that she had “signed up for the long haul.”

Peltola, a former state lawmaker who most recently worked for a commission whose goal is to rebuild salmon resources on the Kuskokwim River, cast herself as a “regular” Alaskan. “I’m not a millionaire. I’m not an international celebrity,” she said.

Peltola has said she was hopeful that the new system would allow more moderate candidates to be elected.

During the campaign, she emphasized her support of abortion rights and said she wanted to elevate issues of ocean productivity and food security. Peltola said she got a boost after the June special primary when she won endorsements from Democrats and independents who had been in the race. She said she believed her positive messaging also resonated with voters.

“It’s been very attractive to a lot of people to have a message of working together and positivity and holding each other up and unity and as Americans none of us are each other’s enemy,” she said. “That is just a message that people really need to hear right now.”

Alaska voters in 2020 approved an elections process that replaced party primaries with open primaries. Under the new system, ranked voting is used in general elections.

Under ranked voting, ballots are counted in rounds. A candidate can win outright with more than 50% of the vote in the first round. If no one hits that threshold, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who chose that candidate as their top pick have their votes count for their next choice. Rounds continue until two candidates remain, and whoever has the most votes wins.

In Alaska, voters last backed a Democrat for president in 1964. The number of registered voters who are unaffiliated with a party is greater than the number of registered Republicans or Democrats combined, according to statistics from the Division of Elections.

The last Democratic member of Alaska’s congressional delegation was Mark Begich, Nick Begich’s uncle, who served one term in the U.S. Senate and lost his 2014 reelection bid.

Alaska’s U.S. senators, Republicans Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, congratulated Peltola.

Murkowski said Peltola “has a long track record of public service to our great state.” Murkowski and Peltola were in the state Legislature together.
Congratulations to Peltola. I hope that as member of Gryffindor House she and her cohorts continue to win the House Cup for years to come.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
Come on why would you come up with your own numbers when you can just use the ones I posted. Is it not true that it wouldn't matter who the Palin voters put as their second due to the elimination of Begich? Isn't it a problem then that the second choices (if any) of the Palin people are not considered?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Palin joined the election late and has hardly even been visiting the state during the campaign.  She had one tele-rally with Trump in June.  One campaign rally event with Trump on July 9 and then never had another campaign event until the election!  She's having another tele-rally with Trump tonight and now she has no future events scheduled in Alaska until the November election.   Will she even be in Alaska?

Exit polling suggests that most Palin voters would settle for Begich but a sizable proportion of Begich voters would rather see a Democrat win then Palin.

Seems like the Republican's best move is to ditch Palin
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Come on why would you come up with your own numbers when you can just use the ones I posted. Is it not true that it wouldn't matter who the Palin voters put as their second due to the elimination of Begich? Isn't it a problem then that the second choices (if any) of the Palin people are not considered?
their second choices are NEVER considered UNLESS palin is at the BOTTOM of the list

and somehow i doubt she was ever out of the top 3 and probably in the top 2
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
Come on why would you come up with your own numbers when you can just use the ones I posted. Is it not true that it wouldn't matter who the Palin voters put as their second due to the elimination of Begich? Isn't it a problem then that the second choices (if any) of the Palin people are not considered?
their second choices are NEVER considered UNLESS palin is at the BOTTOM of the list

and somehow i doubt she was ever out of the top 3 and probably in the top 2
Isn't it a problem then that the second choices (if any) of the Palin people are not considered?
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Isn't it a problem then that the second choices (if any) of the Palin people are not considered?
NO

THE SECOND CHOICES ARE RARELY CONSIDERED

ONLY THE SECOND CHOICES OF THE LAST PLACE RANKED CANDIDATE

ARE EVEN LOOKED AT

was palin ranked last place ?
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
NO

THE SECOND CHOICES ARE RARELY CONSIDERED

ONLY THE SECOND CHOICES OF THE LAST PLACE RANKED CANDIDATE

ARE EVEN LOOKED AT
I understand that is how it works, I think it's a problem.

The whole point of ranked choice voting is freeing the voter from having to choose between the ideal option and the tactical option. Elimination based on first choice means that is not the case.

If the Palin voters had strong reason to believe that Begich would be eliminated and not enough Begich people would go to Palin the tactical option would be to put Begich as 1st and Palin as second despite Palin being their ideal choice.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
If the Palin voters had strong reason to believe that Begich would be eliminated and not enough Begich people would go to Palin the tactical option would be to put Begich as 1st and Palin as second despite Palin being their ideal choice.
run those numbers

would that have made any difference ?

i mean, if palin didn't get any first choice votes

they would have been eliminated in the first round

and therefore not eligible to receive any second round votes
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
RCV is unconstitutional imo if you allow for ballot exhaustion. If we are talking about one person, one vote. Someone who votes for Begich then Palin matter more than someone who just votes Begich. The letters vote doesn’t even count. So, even though they voted, they actually didn’t because Begich came in third, not second.

If you want RCV, there should be no option for ballot exhaustion. Rank all the candidates from 1-100, so every voter has a vote. Right now the system is that you can vote, but your vote may not necessary count in the final results. How is that uphold one person one vote?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11

If the Palin voters had strong reason to believe that Begich would be eliminated and not enough Begich people would go to Palin the tactical option would be to put Begich as 1st and Palin as second despite Palin being their ideal choice.
I think that would happen in many situations but Trump voters aren't allowed to break ranks.  If Republicans want that seat back in November, Trump is going to have to throw his support to Begich.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
The problem here is that Palin won Begich voters 2-1. But this is after 1/3 of Begich votes exhausted meaning they only listed Begich and no second. With a primary system, Palin would’ve easily won by 5-10
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
I think that would happen in many situations but Trump voters aren't allowed to break ranks.  If Republicans want that seat back in November, Trump is going to have to throw his support to Begich.
I actually disagree. If the 30% that didn’t rank anyone second, come home to Palin, she easily wins. RCV is confusing 
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
If the Palin voters had strong reason to believe that Begich would be eliminated and not enough Begich people would go to Palin the tactical option would be to put Begich as 1st and Palin as second despite Palin being their ideal choice.
run those numbers

would that have made any difference ?
I did run those numbers in #33. If 58,973 who preferred Palin over Begich put down Begich as their 1st choice (lying as it were) because they considered Peltola intolerable Begich would have won a straight majority with 112,783 first choice votes.

It's not solving the problem it's supposed to be solving, well it's not solving all of it. As you have made clear it does free you to pick a 1st rank candidate that will almost certainly be eliminated without sacrificing tactics. If however the candidate may not be eliminated, it solves nothing and tactical concerns may contradict with honest preference.

The fact that you are a champion of ranked choice voting (or so orogami implied) and don't seem familiar this dynamic lends enormous credence to my claim that the average voter did not understand the potential consequences. They probably thought "Oh ranked choice voting means I can vote for who I really want to win and it will all work out", but as I have proved that is not the case.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I think they’re saying if Palin voters put Begich first, Palin would fall to 3rd and get eliminated. Begich would win against Peltola because a smaller number of Palin votes would exhaust. Palin voters would never vote for Peltola and don’t want to see a Democrat win, so Begich would be second optiob
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ILikePie5
The problem here is that Palin won Begich voters 2-1. But this is after 1/3 of Begich votes exhausted meaning they only listed Begich and no second. With a primary system, Palin would’ve easily won by 5-10
  • False.
53,810 voted for Begich first

of these, 42,520 (80%) listed a second choice
of these,  15,467 (36%) preferred a democrat to Palin
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@ILikePie5
That's what I'm saying, but I'm also saying that the system is flawed because the same outcome should happen if Palin voters put Begich as second.

Because of first choice elimination the fact that many (perhaps all) Palin voters would prefer Begich over Peltola is discarded.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ILikePie5
I actually disagree. If the 30% that didn’t rank anyone second, come home to Palin, she easily wins. RCV is confusing 

As I said, exit polling strongly suggests those Republicans who left second place blank weren't confused- overwhelmingly the refused to vote for a democrat or Palin.


3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
RCV is unconstitutional imo if you allow for ballot exhaustion. If we are talking about one person, one vote. Someone who votes for Begich then Palin matter more than someone who just votes Begich. The letters vote doesn’t even count. So, even though they voted, they actually didn’t because Begich came in third, not second.
jesus christ, it's EXACTLY THE SAME as a "run-off" election

does a "run-off" election violate "1 voter = 1 vote" ?

since they are called back to the same poll and vote on the same office a second time ?
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
If 58,973 who preferred Palin over Begich put down Begich as their 1st choice (lying as it were)
they should not lie

you can't fault a system

if the voters are lying
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
53,810 voted for Begich first

of these, 42,520 (80%) listed a second choice
of these,  15,467 (36%) preferred a democrat to Palin
My b. My point still stands with 20% of Begich voters. If those 20% of Begich voters voted Palin, she would’ve won by 5,000 votes. It’s a problem of RCV that disenfranchises voters.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
If you want RCV, there should be no option for ballot exhaustion. Rank all the candidates from 1-100, so every voter has a vote. Right now the system is that you can vote, but your vote may not necessary count in the final results. How is that uphold one person one vote?
this is exactly the same as failing to show up for a "run-off" election

should all voters be REQUIRED BY LAW to show up for a "run-off" ?
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
As I said, exit polling strongly suggests those Republicans who left second place blank weren't confused- overwhelmingly the refused to vote for a democrat or Palin.
In doing so their vote didn’t count. My entire premise that that one person one vote is violated with RCV
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
tactical concerns may contradict with honest preference.
explain to me which voting system doesn't have this "problem"
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I think this conversation is encouraging.  Republicans will blame Democrats or RCV or whatever rather than recognize that MAGA is dividing the GOP vote- which should significantly help Democrats in the next two elections.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
jesus christ, it's EXACTLY THE SAME as a "run-off" election

does a "run-off" election violate "1 voter = 1 vote" ?

since they are called back to the same poll and vote on the same office a second time ?
False. Runoffs are completely separate elections where the one person one vote still applies. In RCV your ballot can get exhausted and there’s only one election. You get 2 votes for one election while someone only gets one because ballot exhaustion is an option. 

this is exactly the same as failing to show up for a "run-off" election

should all voters be REQUIRED BY LAW to show up for a "run-off" ?
Again runoffs are separate elections that happen days after the original primary date. It allows for more campaign time and focused one on ones, which is inherently a better system. With runoffs, someone who didn’t vote in the original primary can also vote. With RCV you have one person 5 votes compared to one person one vote. With runoffs it’s still one person one vote.