God help us all: Ranked Choice Voting will be on the ballot in Massachusetts this November

[SuburbanFarmer]

I do not see this as a bad thing. This opens to the door for more parties, but the key will depend on how the votes are reported. The only thing that needs to be done to get 3rd party candidates into the federal government is the realization that voting 3rd party is not a wasted vote.

This. I don’t believe a majority of Americans will vote for the duopoly, if they have a choice.

[de officiis]

Objections - for those interested in seeing the downsides.

https://www.heritage.org/election-integ ... bad-choice

[SuburbanFarmer]

Objections - for those interested in seeing the downsides.

https://www.heritage.org/election-integ ... bad-choice

In the end, a voter’s ballot might wind up being cast for the candidate he ranked far below his first choice—a candidate to whom he may have strong political objections and for whom he would not vote in a traditional voting system.

No. If a voter had 'strong political objections' to a candidate, then he wouldn't pick them.

Now imagine if, instead, you had to rank-order all the steak sauces—even the ones you dislike—and at checkout the cashier swaps out your bottle of Heinz 57 with the cheap generic you ranked dead last. Why? Well, the majority of shoppers also down-voted it, but there was no clear front-runner, so the generic snuck up from behind with enough down ballot picks to win. In fact, in this ranked choice supermarket, you might even have helped the lousy generic brand win.

No. You don't "have" to vote for anyone. You simply rank them until you don't want to.
Also, we need more 'generic' presidents. Less absurd extremes.

Frankly, that article smacks of establishment fear-mongering.

[Martin Hash]

I’m a 3rd Party candidate. A LOT of people say they’d like to vote for me but they don’t want to risk losing; a bird in the hand situation. If there was rank-ordering, I’d get tons of 2nd choice votes even though I was really the 1st choice.

p.s. I’ve never won anything by popular vote in my life, so I’m talking out of my ass here. Maybe people are just being nice when they tell me that.

[clubgop]

Don't the states have the right to allocate their electors in any way they see fit? This is actually an ideal voting system.

Yes, as this would dilute their power they wouldn't adopt it.

[clubgop]

A D will vote D 1st, and 3rd Party 2nd; same for Rs. 3rd Party could easily get more votes, like every time if there's only 1. Run 3rd Party, dude.

If all the Ds and Rs put the 3rd party in second place it will still end up being a D or R that wins because the 3rd party will still be the distant last in the first round.

No, because there will never be a clear winner between D and R. Thus, whatever 3rd candidate was selected most often as "second choice" will win.

What? How are fucking this up so bad? This IS WORSE THAN YOUR PRIMARY ELECTION SHIT.

[clubgop]

Alright all of you seem to be fucking this up. This is why we can't do this. Think of this as a college application process. You list the colleges you want to go to in a ranked order. The third party is like the little expensive exclusive specialty college you really want to go to as your first choice. Then the list goes down from there onto your fall back state college, lets say your two big parties. If by some miracle you get into your first choice the rest of your list doesn't matter only until your 1st choice is eliminated is the rest of your list considered. If you are voting for the big parties first then the third parties second you are defeating the entire purpose of RCV and your secondary choices wont be reported.

[clubgop]

Objections - for those interested in seeing the downsides.

https://www.heritage.org/election-integ ... bad-choice

In the end, a voter’s ballot might wind up being cast for the candidate he ranked far below his first choice—a candidate to whom he may have strong political objections and for whom he would not vote in a traditional voting system.

No. If a voter had 'strong political objections' to a candidate, then he wouldn't pick them.

Now imagine if, instead, you had to rank-order all the steak sauces—even the ones you dislike—and at checkout the cashier swaps out your bottle of Heinz 57 with the cheap generic you ranked dead last. Why? Well, the majority of shoppers also down-voted it, but there was no clear front-runner, so the generic snuck up from behind with enough down ballot picks to win. In fact, in this ranked choice supermarket, you might even have helped the lousy generic brand win.

No. You don't "have" to vote for anyone. You simply rank them until you don't want to.
Also, we need more 'generic' presidents. Less absurd extremes.

Frankly, that article smacks of establishment fear-mongering.

RCV promotes absurd extremes over the "generic" run of the mill parties. You have it backwards.

[PartyOf5]

I’m a 3rd Party candidate. A LOT of people say they’d like to vote for me but they don’t want to risk losing; a bird in the hand situation. If there was rank-ordering, I’d get tons of 2nd choice votes even though I was really the 1st choice.

p.s. I’ve never won anything by popular vote in my life, so I’m talking out of my ass here. Maybe people are just being nice when they tell me that.

Lots of 2nd choice votes wouldn't matter. If you were last in first place votes in the initial round you would be eliminated.

we've had 3rd party candidates in elections. They end up getting maybe 10% of the vote. In ranked choice they would still get eliminated. The only difference would be where their 10% would get divided up between the D and R.

[PartyOf5]

No, because there will never be a clear winner between D and R. Thus, whatever 3rd candidate was selected most often as "second choice" will win.

What? How are fucking this up so bad? This IS WORSE THAN YOUR PRIMARY ELECTION SHIT.

No shit. He doesn't even understand his own Barney video.

This is a perfect example of why this will not work. People won't understand it.