tuscl

Ranked choice voting

Avatar for skibum609
skibum609Massachusetts

I see it as nothing more than blatant cheating and the winner will always be from the party that runs the most similar candidates. Those who cry our democracy is in danger, are always the progressives putting it in danger, by their constant cheating.

Comments

last comment
Avatar for gammanu95
gammanu95

Ranked choice voting, open primaries, and runoff elections are attempts to rig the system. They are designed to shut out 3rd party candidates and independents. They should not be permitted in our republic.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for skibum609
skibum609

^Well said sir.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Klause
Klause

How does ranked choice voting shut out 3rd parties? Teach me.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for skibum609
skibum609

The Democratic Socialists run 5 candidates, against the one most popular candidate. They agree to encourage their supporters to vote for them 1-5. Most popular candidate wins the most 1st place votes but gets no other votes and loses. I person 1 vote. Ranked choice is the epitome of cheating because people are getting more than one vote and gaming the system.
One salient fact the lying mainstream media isn't mentioning about the muslim fuck in New York? Incredibly low turnout. Add that to running against a sex offender and cheating and you have progressives cheating, again.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

Ranked choice voting makes elections more fair. It just lets people rank candidates. It gives people a bigger voice.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for mogul1985
mogul1985

RCV was on the ballot last November and was vote NO. RCV is happening in RED States help locked in the Marxists.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for mogul1985
mogul1985

Jungle Primaries are also a serious problem with RCV

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for twentyfive
twentyfive

I didn’t have any thoughts about it, until icee chimed in if he thinks it’s a good thing, I’m against it.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

You mean more people are voting for candidates that represent peoples interests and you dont like that.

If right wing candidates were popular it would benefit them. But it doesn't because theyre not.

Its republikkkans always trying to redraw district maps to benefit them. Thats undemocratic.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for mogul1985
mogul1985

2 min explanation how RCV manipulates elections thefga.org

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for mogul1985
mogul1985

When I said it was voted NO last November that was in Colorado

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

Right wing extremists complaining how more fair elections hurt them

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for gobstopper007
gobstopper007

One vote per person per available seat. Really is simple. If I believe candidate A is the most qualified then there is no logical reason to vote for a “next best choice”.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

If the right wing candidates were popular they would win.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Puddy Tat
Puddy Tat

^ You mean popular like the last election, tard bait?

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

Popular like in areas with rcv and they lose

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

Youre a triggered lil republitrick

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Puddy Tat
Puddy Tat

Because RCV is a left-wing gimmick, tard bait. Stay mad!

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for fatdan99
fatdan99

In a democracy, it should not be possible to get elected with 25% of the vote. The nut case can get the most media attention for saying crazy stuff--while the rest of the vote may be distributed among 10 other candidates. Maybe first past the post made sense in middle ages England, where just reading and counting votes is way past the capabilities of most citizens. But in the computer age, instant run-off saves expense of running another election. Also it allows the voter to give more input. You love Trump, vote him number one and that is it. You think Harris is the lesser of two evils, vote her last in your list and leave Trump off. We spend a lot time and money on elections. Only collecting the minimum information possible is a total waste of a great opportunity to make the public's thoughts on the candidates known. If the majority of NYC voters (at least the ones who bothered to vote) want Mamdani, that is their choice as long as it is a majority of voters. But the people complaining about ranked choice voting in NYC are really out of touch with reality. Mamdani won the first past the post vote total 43% to 36% according to APnews. So sure you can complain about Mamdani, but if you don't live in NYC I don't know why you would care. But saying it was the result of the election system...does not fit the available easily verifiable facts--not that that would prevent certain media folks from spending thousands of on-air hours making such claims. And now those ridiculous claims get echoed around our society.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for skibum609
skibum609

Icey may literally be the single stupidest person on earth. Thanks for proving my point useless, stupid, asshole. Wanna be thug, rapper, retard.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for gammanu95
gammanu95

^So many liberal talking points and factual fallacies, all written to ignore and minimize one irrefutable truth: ranked choice voting and runoff elections are dishonest plays used by leftists in their central quest for perpetual power. It is inherently un-American. That is why a plurality wins in federal elections.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for gammanu95
gammanu95

^meant for fatdan

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for skibum609
skibum609

Ranked choice voting is still cheating and the fact that Mamdani won a poorly attended primary in a one-party city and managed to beat a sex offender by just 7% points, even if it was an honest election, which it was not, is incredibly meaningless nationally. Of course, the alleged 7% victory is a scam as well since we have no idea how people would have voted in an honest election where they only had one vote.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

So youre whining because when people rank candidates the ones with right wing extremist views are at the bottom 🤡💩 😂😂😂 😭

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for twentyfive
twentyfive

Seems pretty stupid, kind of like how this current generation is learning that they are all winners. Nobody ever loses if we don’t keep score.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for skibum609
skibum609

^^How fucking stupid must one be to figure out that voting for 5 people is 5 votes and not one. One person, one vote. God your parents must have literally been pigs and dogs.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

Skicuck. Its like voting a party ticket.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Puddy Tat
Puddy Tat

^ Except that it isn't, dumbass.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

Youre acting retarded because your candidates cant win a party ticket

Go obsess over trannies or run to founder coz you get exposed on here 🤡💩

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Puddy Tat
Puddy Tat

^ We won 2024, you stupid, impotent little penis!

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for chunkychicano
chunkychicano

So for RCV in order to win you have to have more than 50% of the total votes. People rank the candidates 1-5… if nobody wins 50% of the vote, they redo the vote based on everyones second choice candidate, is that correct?
And everyones 1-5 ranking wont be the same, so the winner could turn out to be whoever wins at least 50%+ of any of the rounds..? For example if nobody votes for Mamdani as their number 1 choice, but tons of people put him as their 3rd choice, he would win if the 1st and 2nd rounds didnt have a winner?

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

This thread is about rcv christian tranny obsessed nutjob

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Puddy Tat
Puddy Tat

^ It's about you lost! No one talking trannies or religion here except your dumb ass.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey

You're obsessed with hating trannies and loving Christian terrorists. Weirdo

If your alt right wins so much dont worry about voting 🤡💩

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey
0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Icey
Icey
0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for chunkychicano
chunkychicano

^So the process basically has a bunch of luck mixed into it. The winner is whoever is lucky enough to win one of the rounds. Or if a ton of people put the same guy as their 3rd choice.. but there were big differences in the 1st and 2nd choices, then the 3rd choice guy wins.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for Klause
Klause

Sorry but the arguments I'm seeing against RCV are weird as hell. It's arguing scenarios that don't exist in RCV. There's no luck. There's nothing stacked. You can't win with a minority of the vote.

You pick your fave, and then your second choice, then your third. If your fave gets knocked out, your vote goes to your second choice. If they get knocked out, it goes to the third. You keep your vote as consistent as possible with your own beliefs. It's literally giving you the best available option for your personal vote. It's weird as hell that there is an argument against that.

0
0

Log in to vote

Avatar for JamesSD
JamesSD

The two party system has reached a point where extremist candidates tend to thrive on both sides. Your average voter is way more moderate than either major political party.

The main goal of RCV is to reduce "lesser of two evils" voting and let more voters support the candidates they actually want. It also eliminates situations where Candidate A gets 36 percent of the vote in a crowded field, but was the least preferred option of the remaining 64 percent, split among the other candidates.

It really is ideal for non partisan offices like Mayor or city council.

0
0

Log in to vote

Want to add a comment?