139
this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
139 points (95.4% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3688 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This guy was elected by rank choice voting, folks.
Are you suggesting the math doesn't work in RCV, or that the other choices were worse and they dodged bullets by using RCV?
RCV doesn't achieve better results than our current system because they elected Eric Adams who didn't even live in NYC at the time and is now under criminal investigation. I'm more than willing to wait to see more results from RCV elections before completely damning it, but I have low expectations. Corruption almost always win. That's the main problem.
Other places, not just a few in the US, use RCV, so there's plenty of real data to go by, plus the math itself. There are other systems out there that add to RCV, but even by itself it is absolutely better than FPTP which is mathematically shown to favor only two major parties even when started off with lots of evenly preferred parties.
You're correct on if there aren't any good selections there can't be a good pick, but don't condemn an election system because of that. Make it so parties have to work to stay relevant. Or as Washington warned, just don't have parties to become this way, but I don't know if that's possible in a larger and more complex society.
What’s that have to do with anything?
He was elected by all the locally based media conducting a counterfactual campaign of manufacturing a violent crime crisis and convincing the people of New York that only a cop or a vigilante could save them.
Given that it worked and Sliwa is an absolute maniac and a Republican in a New York election, the fascist cop (but I repeat myself) would have won regardless of the type of voting.
Hopefully the people of New York will be less credulous the next time the billionaire owned media tries to wag the dog, but I doubt it.
Why do you seem to assume that RCV doesn't require options that aren't terrible and an educated electorate?
It's not some magical solution to our problems. If the choices are shit, you still end up with shit, it's just ranked shit.
Denser than plutonium in a lead case on this particular take man.
Cool... And?
Hitler probably would've won in a ranked vote as well [at the time]. Nothing about ranked choice guarantees higher quality candidates. I'm sure most don't telegraph their corruption either, unless they're named Trump
Actually, ranked choice voting might’ve been able to delay hitlers election since the KDP and SPD voters probably wouldn’t put the nazi party as their second choice
He was also elected in a democracy, clearly that means democracy is bad.
Thankfully, with the majority of the US there is no ranked voting. So therefore we only elect the best!