"New Ballot Initiative Proposes Bringing Ranked-Choice Voting And Open Primaries To D.C."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've heard it said that ranked choice voting is how NYC finally got a moderate mayor, no? Sounds promising to me!

NYC got Eric Adams through ranked choice voting. Be careful what you wish for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure this is actually being pushed by Republicans so they can have a chance to take over by confusing the lower information voters.

What Republicans? There's like five of them in DC. Here's a list of cities that use ranked choice voting:

San Francisco
New York City
Portland, Oregon
Seattle
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Berkeley, California
Minneapolis
Portland, Maine
Takoma, Maryland
Arlington, Virginia
Burlington, Vermont

You'll notice that it's highly liberal areas that tend to adopt ranked choice voting...

Let's say you have two candidates: 2 white and one black. The two white candidates form an agreement to ask their supporters to vote the other white person as their second choice. Who loses in this situation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure this is actually being pushed by Republicans so they can have a chance to take over by confusing the lower information voters.

What Republicans? There's like five of them in DC. Here's a list of cities that use ranked choice voting:

San Francisco
New York City
Portland, Oregon
Seattle
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Berkeley, California
Minneapolis
Portland, Maine
Takoma, Maryland
Arlington, Virginia
Burlington, Vermont

You'll notice that it's highly liberal areas that tend to adopt ranked choice voting...

Let's say you have two candidates: 2 white and one black. The two white candidates form an agreement to ask their supporters to vote the other white person as their second choice. Who loses in this situation?

Not enough info. Race alone is not a valid reason to vote for or against anyone.

You are using racist logic. How ironic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure this is actually being pushed by Republicans so they can have a chance to take over by confusing the lower information voters.

What Republicans? There's like five of them in DC. Here's a list of cities that use ranked choice voting:

San Francisco
New York City
Portland, Oregon
Seattle
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Berkeley, California
Minneapolis
Portland, Maine
Takoma, Maryland
Arlington, Virginia
Burlington, Vermont

You'll notice that it's highly liberal areas that tend to adopt ranked choice voting...

Let's say you have two candidates: 2 white and one black. The two white candidates form an agreement to ask their supporters to vote the other white person as their second choice. Who loses in this situation?

What sort of 1955 Alabama question in that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've heard it said that ranked choice voting is how NYC finally got a moderate mayor, no? Sounds promising to me!

NYC got Eric Adams through ranked choice voting. Be careful what you wish for.

It's obviously not a cure-all, you need to have some decent candidates. But it would prevent situations like the ones we keep seeing here, with three challengers to a lousy incumbent who then wins the primary with 30 percent of the vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure this is actually being pushed by Republicans so they can have a chance to take over by confusing the lower information voters.

What Republicans? There's like five of them in DC. Here's a list of cities that use ranked choice voting:

San Francisco
New York City
Portland, Oregon
Seattle
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Berkeley, California
Minneapolis
Portland, Maine
Takoma, Maryland
Arlington, Virginia
Burlington, Vermont

You'll notice that it's highly liberal areas that tend to adopt ranked choice voting...

Let's say you have two candidates: 2 white and one black. The two white candidates form an agreement to ask their supporters to vote the other white person as their second choice. Who loses in this situation?

The people. Politicians win, the people lose. It’s been that way all the way back to the Greeks.

[Anonymous]

People win, Charles Allen needs to dust off his CV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure this is actually being pushed by Republicans so they can have a chance to take over by confusing the lower information voters.

What Republicans? There's like five of them in DC. Here's a list of cities that use ranked choice voting:

San Francisco
New York City
Portland, Oregon
Seattle
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Berkeley, California
Minneapolis
Portland, Maine
Takoma, Maryland
Arlington, Virginia
Burlington, Vermont

You'll notice that it's highly liberal areas that tend to adopt ranked choice voting...

Let's say you have two candidates: 2 white and one black. The two white candidates form an agreement to ask their supporters to vote the other white person as their second choice. Who loses in this situation?

Depends on who the candidates are and what they say they'll do, doesn't it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've heard it said that ranked choice voting is how NYC finally got a moderate mayor, no? Sounds promising to me!

NYC got Eric Adams through ranked choice voting. Be careful what you wish for.

What a silly statement.

George Santos was elected without RCV so what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure this is actually being pushed by Republicans so they can have a chance to take over by confusing the lower information voters.

What Republicans? There's like five of them in DC. Here's a list of cities that use ranked choice voting:

San Francisco
New York City
Portland, Oregon
Seattle
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Berkeley, California
Minneapolis
Portland, Maine
Takoma, Maryland
Arlington, Virginia
Burlington, Vermont

You'll notice that it's highly liberal areas that tend to adopt ranked choice voting...

Let's say you have three candidates: 2 white and one black. The two white candidates form an agreement to ask their supporters to vote the other white person as their second choice. Who loses in this situation?

Not enough info. Race alone is not a valid reason to vote for or against anyone.

You are using racist logic. How ironic.

Keeping it real.

[Anonymous]

I'd rather have run-off elections. That gives voters the clearest choices and enable an election of the person preferred by most voters, not the spoiler candidate who came in highest at 2nd place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd rather have run-off elections. That gives voters the clearest choices and enable an election of the person preferred by most voters, not the spoiler candidate who came in highest at 2nd place.

Do want to pay for that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The DC Dems look terrible opposing ranked choice. I think they are just worried about losing control of council which has way too many encumbents and is going too far to the left. I have lived here for 25 years and I don't know anyone who wants extreme prgoressives. Ranked choice might actually get us some common sense, centrist candidates.

If there was a clear strong candidate that was a common sense centrist wouldn't they be able to just win? Why does ranked choice help all that much?

I'm highly annoyed it was paired with open primaries which I won't support. And when I signed a petition to support RCV going on the ballot, there was no mention of the other part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC Dems look terrible opposing ranked choice. I think they are just worried about losing control of council which has way too many encumbents and is going too far to the left. I have lived here for 25 years and I don't know anyone who wants extreme prgoressives. Ranked choice might actually get us some common sense, centrist candidates.

If there was a clear strong candidate that was a common sense centrist wouldn't they be able to just win? Why does ranked choice help all that much?

I'm highly annoyed it was paired with open primaries which I won't support. And when I signed a petition to support RCV going on the ballot, there was no mention of the other part.

If there's a candidate who can get more than 50 percent of the vote, then RCV does nothing.

Where it helps is in races like the Ward 7 primary this year where the winner got all of 2,900 votes or roughly five percent of the support of all the registered voters in Ward 7.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The DC Dems look terrible opposing ranked choice. I think they are just worried about losing control of council which has way too many encumbents and is going too far to the left. I have lived here for 25 years and I don't know anyone who wants extreme prgoressives. Ranked choice might actually get us some common sense, centrist candidates.

If there was a clear strong candidate that was a common sense centrist wouldn't they be able to just win? Why does ranked choice help all that much?

I'm highly annoyed it was paired with open primaries which I won't support. And when I signed a petition to support RCV going on the ballot, there was no mention of the other part.

It's very strange that some complain about DC not having a vote in Congress, and then they turn around and support barring independents from voting in the only local elections that matter. Can't have it both ways.