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

[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.

This is a runoff election, it's just that it's held at the same time as the initial election. Will take a few cycles for candidates and voters to adjust to it, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's not strange. They are entirely unrelated and you have failed to make a point here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's not strange. They are entirely unrelated and you have failed to make a point here.

The PP point is that choice is prohibited in both circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a runoff election, it's just that it's held at the same time as the initial election. Will take a few cycles for candidates and voters to adjust to it, though.

Run on off with what? Most of these council types are running unopposed no matter how bad they suck. 83
yes

[Anonymous]

Grifters taking bribes and staging comebacks offend me. Yes on 83

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's not strange. They are entirely unrelated and you have failed to make a point here.

Why won't right wingers give DC a vote in Congress? Well, they have a lot of reasons that sound high minded, but the real reason is they dont approve of the people they think DC will vote for.

Why won't left wingers in DC allow independents to vote in the only local elections that matter? Well, they have a lot of reasons that sound high minded, but the real reason is they don't approve of the people they think independents will vote for.

Here's a crazy idea: How about we stop disenfranchising people based on what we assume are their political preferences?

[Anonymous]

Illegal immigrants who've only lived in DC for 30 days are allowed to vote in DC primaries, but independents who've lived and paid taxes here their whole lives here aren't? Give me a break. Yes on 83.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Illegal immigrants who've only lived in DC for 30 days are allowed to vote in DC primaries, but independents who've lived and paid taxes here their whole lives here aren't? Give me a break. Yes on 83.

You sound like a maga. I will vote no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Illegal immigrants who've only lived in DC for 30 days are allowed to vote in DC primaries, but independents who've lived and paid taxes here their whole lives here aren't? Give me a break. Yes on 83.

I'm voting yes on 83, and I will probably change my registration from D to independent if it passes, but it's not true that you're "not allowed" to vote in D.C. primaries. You could just register Democratic. You can actually change your registration same-day if you want, and then change back for the general election, it's just kind of an unnecessary number of steps to jump through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a runoff election, it's just that it's held at the same time as the initial election. Will take a few cycles for candidates and voters to adjust to it, though.

Run on off with what? Most of these council types are running unopposed no matter how bad they suck. 83
yes

Most of them run effectively unopposed in the general, but they often have like nine opponents in the primary, all of whom split the anti-incumbent vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a runoff election, it's just that it's held at the same time as the initial election. Will take a few cycles for candidates and voters to adjust to it, though.

Run on off with what? Most of these council types are running unopposed no matter how bad they suck. 83
yes

Most of them run effectively unopposed in the general, but they often have like nine opponents in the primary, all of whom split the anti-incumbent vote.

Yep. More people have voted against Brianne Nadeau than for her in every single Dem primary, yet here we are in what seems like Year 25 with that that incompetent cretin. She's toast if ranked-choice passes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Illegal immigrants who've only lived in DC for 30 days are allowed to vote in DC primaries, but independents who've lived and paid taxes here their whole lives here aren't? Give me a break. Yes on 83.

I'm voting yes on 83, and I will probably change my registration from D to independent if it passes, but it's not true that you're "not allowed" to vote in D.C. primaries. You could just register Democratic. You can actually change your registration same-day if you want, and then change back for the general election, it's just kind of an unnecessary number of steps to jump through.

Can you? It used to be where you had to do it more than 30 days before the election, which is why I finally registered as a D in DC rather than an I. Did they change it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Illegal immigrants who've only lived in DC for 30 days are allowed to vote in DC primaries, but independents who've lived and paid taxes here their whole lives here aren't? Give me a break. Yes on 83.

I'm voting yes on 83, and I will probably change my registration from D to independent if it passes, but it's not true that you're "not allowed" to vote in D.C. primaries. You could just register Democratic. You can actually change your registration same-day if you want, and then change back for the general election, it's just kind of an unnecessary number of steps to jump through.

Can you? It used to be where you had to do it more than 30 days before the election, which is why I finally registered as a D in DC rather than an I. Did they change it?

I think you have to do it either 30 days before or do it in person at an early-vote location or an Election Day polling place. Can't do it for vote by mail.

[Anonymous]

I already voted. Voted in favor. But even if passed, it sounds like they won’t implement it.

[Anonymous]

Voting no.