|
The superior voting system is This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| First-past-the-post voting |
|
1 | 1.47% |
| Preferential voting (IRV) |
|
67 | 98.53% |
| Total: | 68 votes | ||
|
Weatherman posted:Oh good, I like to hear about the downsides of IRV. Let's hear them: Alameda County ran headlong into a DOJ/Office of Civil Rights consent decree during their implementation of IRV, and it highlights one of the challenges of the system. If there's a segment of the voter base that isn't proficient in the dominant language, it's a disruptive change in process they're unlikely to hear about until election day, absent significant intervention. In other, more traditional, reforms this is less of an issue as voting in the old manner doesn't carry much risk of spoiling the ballot while the potential for suboptimal strategy is also reduced as voters will vote for the candidate they like best. Both of these are heightened in IRV. I still like it, especially over FPTP in most spaces, but the added complexity and unfamiliarity is a larger burden on communities with low rates of English speaking, who are typically underrepresented in our politics anyway. icantfindaname posted:The only states this would have any chance of being enacted in are already blue, so it would serve to retrench centrist power there while doing nothing to the increasingly gerymandered and right-wing delegations from red states. That seems bad on net to me Your hypothetical electorate where the majority of primary voters support a Left candidate (who has enough approval from the centrist wing they they'll go D in the general despite their choice losing the primary) but are cheated out of representation by an alliance of the centrist hordes and nevertrumpers seems... disconnected from reality. Especially in light of the primary results in Cali. I'll agree that the great progressive takeover is most likely to occur when you only need 50%+1 of the Dem primary voters in a blue state to make it happen, but there have been few indications that we're approaching that threshold in many (any?) places. Meanwhile (if the electorate is actually there but being stymied by the establishment and/or lesser of two evils) IRV can help increase progressive representation in blue areas by weakening the power of traditional gatekeepers.
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 19:17 |
|
|
Weatherman posted:It's not that difficult that someone proficient in the relevant language couldn't write up a primer along the lines of Ken the Voting Dingo. I would agree that having that primer printed out and distributed to the right people in the US would be a task akin to cleaning up Chernobyl while everyone has ebola and North Korea is invading, though, since you guys (not you specifically Para, the American public) has such a hate-boner for anything that might help the wrong people vote. I've got a few cycles of experience with IRV and the results graphics are some of my favorite things! I sincerely wish that our caucuses would transfer over to these instead of IRV but without a secret ballot and in real time and with the general aura of adversarial process. Weatherman posted:The arguments that icandfindaname is making are more along the lines of "The US sucks and it sucks exceptionally® and that's why we can't do anything at all that will objectively help since there other unconnected-but-admittedly-tenuously-related problems remain". I'd like this topic to focus more on how IRV is objectively better than FPTP and less on how "well Democrats suck and the centre sucks and gerrymandering means that
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 00:28
|
|
" if we can.