DEMOCRAT takes SEAT HELD BY GOP for the LAST 50 YEARS

Author: oromagi
oromagi
Mary Peltola
Sarah Palin
red wave blues
hold the door hodor

Posts

Total: 115
#91
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
by design, only the candidate with the lowest vote total is eliminated and their votes move to "second choice"
So what? You have yet to explain why RCV is better than runoffs in any aspect.

it seems insane to make EVERYONE take time off of work and schedule volunteer poll workers and coordinate an entire second or third election
You don’t have to take time off of work. There’s early voting, absentee. Not to mention polls close far after 5pm which is the average time people get off of work.

when only maybe 4 or 5% of the voters (or less) need to "revote"
With more information. There is no objective benefit to doing RCV. It has been a disaster wherever it’s been done

everyone else's vote goes to their FIRST CHOICE, and why would anyone change their FIRST CHOICE in a "run-off" (unless they KNEW their candidate was in last place) ?
There’s a lot of reasons why people would want to change their vote during a runoff when they wouldn’t be in RCV. There could be a scandal. Something could be revealed during the campaign. As I mentioned, RCV is an unknown. Someone who doesn’t want to vote Palin or Peltola votes just for Begich. But they’d prefer the Republican. In a runoff they have a known of Palin vs Begich. In RCV they don’t have that known. 

My argument here is if you want RCV, Force voters to rank 1.2.3.4
#92
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
turn-out for a "run-off" election is ALWAYS lower than the FIRST election

with this in mind, a "run-off" election DISENFRANCHISES MORE VOTERS BECAUSE ALL OF THE VOTES FROM THE FIRST ELECTION ARE TOSSED OUT
You do not know what disenfranchisement is then. You can still vote during a runoff. Clearly information and campaigning isn’t important to you. Plus there are external factors for why turnout is lower for runoffs
#93
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
The only way for them to be comparable is to enforce RCV voters to make choices instead of voting one person. Tell them that 1 choice will result in a null ballot.

Many countries have stricter laws compelling every citizen to vote.
Exactly, I don’t have a problem with RCV, but whoever votes should be forced to rank ALL the candidates. Rank your last choice last obviously. If it gets that far, you’re screwed anyways
#94
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
The only way for them to be comparable is to enforce RCV voters to make choices
are people who vote in an election FORCED to show up a second time for a "run-off" ????
#95
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
So what? You have yet to explain why RCV is better than runoffs in any aspect.
higher voter participation, quicker results, also eliminates the need for "primary" elections

it's a win win win
#96
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
You don’t have to take time off of work. There’s early voting, absentee.
it's almost impossible to absentee vote in a "run-off" election

and there is no "early voting" in a "run-off" election
#97
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
With more information. There is no objective benefit to doing RCV. It has been a disaster wherever it’s been done
citation please
#98
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
There could be a scandal.
AFTER the regularly scheduled election ??????????

that's not going to make any difference
#99
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
My argument here is if you want RCV, Force voters to rank 1.2.3.4
i actually don't have a problem with this

please complete all the selections on your ballot

but this is basically like FORCING people to show up for a "run-off" which seems impossible
#100
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
Plus there are external factors for why turnout is lower for runoffs
who gives a fuck what the reasons are

low turnout for "run-off" elections

is just one of the many factors that

makes RCV clearly superior
#101
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,990
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
but this is basically like FORCING people to show up for a "run-off" which seems impossible
Many European nations have enforced voting. It's not a new concept. It's like jury duty.
#102
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,990
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
#103
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
You do not know what disenfranchisement is then.
the electoral college "winner-take-all" model disenfranchises voters
#104
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
but this is basically like FORCING people to show up for a "run-off" which seems impossible
Many European nations have enforced voting. It's not a new concept. It's like jury duty.
i'm not saying it doesn't exist

i'm saying that this is not currently the case and would be a massive change of policy
#105
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ILikePie5
I can’t believe you think RCV and Runoffs are the same thing. I’m not against RCV. I’m against ballot exhaustion. Because your vote does not count at all. In fact it disenfranchises those who would come and vote in the runoff.
I think you may need to check the definition of disenfranchisement as it doesn’t mean what I think you think it means.

If someone is able to vote in an election - they are franchised; if they are not allowed to vote, or prevented from voting - they are disenfranchised.

If everyone can vote in a single election - and a second election is not held - then no one is being disenfranchised. Their vote may not impact the result but that is a separate issue.

On that second basis: If someone votes for only candidates C and D in their RCV ballot, and Candidate A and B advances to the final run off round - then yes, their vote does not influence the outcome and is considered exhausted.

However, it should be noted that if such voters really wish to express a preference between candidate A and B should they reach the final 2, then these voters could simply fill in a ranking for those candidate and avoid all the unnecessary unpleasantness of a second ballot altogether.

I don’t think it’s reasonable to suggest individuals who were not motivated enough to fill in a ranking for either candidate while standing in a small cubicle filling in rankings - would somehow find motivation to vote in a subsequent election for the those same candidates.

Compare this to say, people voting libertarian or green - who would be happy to show up to vote if their candidate is on the ballot but not motivated enough to show up if not: this means that their actual preference is rarely recorded; given that the impact of voting a second time is much higher than simply competing two boxes on a ballot - RCV allows this - much larger group - to express their limited support.


RCV does two things : it allows people to vote for who they want to vote for, without concern or worry about their vote allowing a candidate they don’t like to get in, and makes it simpler and easier for any individual who is able to vote to vote in the full run off process.

In this respect - RCV is not literally the same as run off elections  - but it’s close enough. The main differences are that RCV has more rounds, the voters express their preference at the same time, rather than at different times.

#106
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
Americans are not good at picking winners. RCV hopes they do better with second or third choices.

#107
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,990
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Shila
I mean, if you think voting is going to change anything, then you already picked a loser.
#108
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Greyparrot
-> @Shila
I mean, if you think voting is going to change anything, then you already picked a loser
Trump and Bush W. are two good examples of voters picking losers. 
Not sure how their second and third picks can improve the situation.

Biden might even be seen as the fourth choice.

First Obama, second Trump, Third Hillary and finally Biden.
#109
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,990
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Shila
We live under an oligarchic republic. Voting is just entertainment for the masses.
#110
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
higher voter participation, quicker results, also eliminates the need for "primary" elections

it's a win win win
1.) More voters vote with runoff voting because there are more opportunities to vote

2.) RCV is anything but quick. Exhibit A was New York Mayoral and Exhibit B was Alaska.

3.) You are misinformed. Alaska did have a primary election. Same with NY Mayoral.

it's almost impossible to absentee vote in a "run-off" election
False. In my homestate of Texas. You have 2 months to vote by absentee.

and there is no "early voting" in a "run-off" election
False. You can early vote for a run off election in the State of Texas
#111
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
3.) You are misinformed. Alaska did have a primary election. Same with NY Mayoral.
i'm not suggesting they are incompatible with "primary" elections

but they eliminate the NEED for "primary" elections
#112
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
it's almost impossible to absentee vote in a "run-off" election
False. In my homestate of Texas. You have 2 months to vote by absentee.
so, you have a full two months between the initially scheduled election and the "run-off" election ?
#113
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
and there is no "early voting" in a "run-off" election
False. You can early vote for a run off election in the State of Texas
You can request an absentee ballot to vote in a runoff election. This can be challenging, however, when the timeframe between a primary and a runoff election is short, sometimes only two or three weeks. It can be difficult to meet the voting deadline when one must request a mailed ballot, receive the ballot, and send it back. [**]
#114
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
1.) More voters vote with runoff voting because there are more opportunities to vote
most people can barely vote once

and even fewer want to do it a second time for the same office

and even fewer for a third time
#115
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
2.) RCV is anything but quick. Exhibit A was New York Mayoral and Exhibit B was Alaska.
i'm not suggesting filling out the ballot itself is "quick"

i'm suggesting that combining an initial election an a "run-off" election reduces the time it takes to figure out who is the winner