I’d vote for Kartman if it drives Charles the Surgeon Allen back into the (unskilled) job market

Puhleassse

Anonymous wrote:Who is funding this campaign? It’s certainly the best of any of the initiatives in recent years. The signs are well-designed and absolutely everywhere.

Republicans and Dem-aligned lobbyists.

Who is funding this campaign? It’s certainly the best of any of the initiatives in recent years. The signs are well-designed and absolutely everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be nice if we didn’t have to vote for corrupt fringe lunatics over and over again just because they’re incumbent Dems.
I love a Dem but draw the line at self-serving, bribe-taking, citizen-ignoring, or any of the above.
Would love term limits too.

why do I feel like RCV will just result in more fringe candidates being elected? nobody loves Anita Bonds but I surely don’t want a council full of twee DSA members.

No idea. The one thing RCV does well is stopping fringe candidates from getting elected.

RCV was the driving force that led to Eric Adams election in NYC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be nice if we didn’t have to vote for corrupt fringe lunatics over and over again just because they’re incumbent Dems.
I love a Dem but draw the line at self-serving, bribe-taking, citizen-ignoring, or any of the above.
Would love term limits too.

why do I feel like RCV will just result in more fringe candidates being elected? nobody loves Anita Bonds but I surely don’t want a council full of twee DSA members.

No idea. The one thing RCV does well is stopping fringe candidates from getting elected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure what will happen is the initiative will pass, and then either the Council will refuse to enact it or a court will throw it out because it essentially combined two questions into one ballot measure.

I support it and hope I'm wrong, but it seems unlikely to actually become law.

The DC Democratic Party already tried to throw it out and lost in court. The Council + Mayor could well refuse to enact it, but I doubt that will be politically tenable if the initiative passes by a large enough margin (i.e., anything north of 60%). The Council didn't much like I-82 either but implemented it nonetheless.

LOL, I-82 was the second attempt to get rid of tips. The Council threw out I-77 without consequence in 2018 despite it winning approval. Never underestimate how mendacious and self-important our council members are.

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure what will happen is the initiative will pass, and then either the Council will refuse to enact it or a court will throw it out because it essentially combined two questions into one ballot measure.

I support it and hope I'm wrong, but it seems unlikely to actually become law.

The DC Democratic Party already tried to throw it out and lost in court. The Council + Mayor could well refuse to enact it, but I doubt that will be politically tenable if the initiative passes by a large enough margin (i.e., anything north of 60%). The Council didn't much like I-82 either but implemented it nonetheless.

Anonymous wrote:It would be nice if we didn’t have to vote for corrupt fringe lunatics over and over again just because they’re incumbent Dems.
I love a Dem but draw the line at self-serving, bribe-taking, citizen-ignoring, or any of the above.
Would love term limits too.

why do I feel like RCV will just result in more fringe candidates being elected? nobody loves Anita Bonds but I surely don’t want a council full of twee DSA members.

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure what will happen is the initiative will pass, and then either the Council will refuse to enact it or a court will throw it out because it essentially combined two questions into one ballot measure.

I support it and hope I'm wrong, but it seems unlikely to actually become law.

If you could actually make things better by voting, they wouldn't let you vote.

Pretty sure what will happen is the initiative will pass, and then either the Council will refuse to enact it or a court will throw it out because it essentially combined two questions into one ballot measure.

I support it and hope I'm wrong, but it seems unlikely to actually become law.

I voted for it. I love RCV, but actually did not like the open primaries element. Held my nose anyway.

Let's see what happens.

It would be nice if we didn’t have to vote for corrupt fringe lunatics over and over again just because they’re incumbent Dems.
I love a Dem but draw the line at self-serving, bribe-taking, citizen-ignoring, or any of the above.
Would love term limits too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I think you are correct.

I can't affect the national decision.

For open primaries, it seems to me like the only reason not to have them would be the fear that enough independents/Rs could jump sides to skew a primary toward a candidate who couldn't win the general election. That doesn't seem like a real risk with DC's demographics since whoever wins the primary is going to win the general no matter what.

Happy to hear others thoughts, but appears to me its the political machine opposing and I am in favor.

The primaries would be open to independents, not to members of a different party -- if you're a registered Republican, you can't vote in the Democratic primary under I83, just like if you're a registered Democrat, you can't vote in the Statehood Green primary.

Very little risk that a Republican would win a citywide election in D.C., which voted 91 percent for Biden in 2020 and 87 percent for Eleanor Holmes Norton.

Thx. Didn’t realize that open would still keep the other party out. Probably didn’t say it well above, but I have the impression that there are places in the country when partisans will flip parties in the primary to support a far extreme candidate hoping the other party will be stuck with a general election candidate who can’t win. Based on stats like you gave for Biden and Norton I don’t think that’s anything we need to worry about in DC in my lifetime since there’s just not enough of the opposition for it to matter if they did (and not worth it for Ds to mucky with an R primary when the winner has no chance).