this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
399 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3770 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 74 points 4 months ago (7 children)

I don't know why people think RCV would be considered difficult, we love ranking shit.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 32 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

It's about preservation of power.

In any solid red or blue location, the party in control will promote any narrative to discredit RCV because it could only weaken their influence in the area.

For example, most people who are progressives vote blue only because the alternative is far worse. But if a heavily blue state were to pass RCV, it might mean gasp that Democrats lose seats to a more progressive party.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

WORST nightmare of liberal fortresses with a significant percentage of alienated progressives such as Detroit, Portland, Austin and all of California!

[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 27 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We should explain it to voters as "create a buzzfeed listicle of your favourite politicians"

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

RCV: where you create a tier list of all available candidates

[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Ballot design.

Some RCV ballot designs are better than others. For example:

Also, as an experience designer who has had the pleasure of sitting in many many user tests, never under estimate how dumb people are. Some people are going to be confused by the new thing because it’s new. Good news is that this goes away after an election or two and most of the public gets used to it.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Great example names BTW! GoGo/Sauce 2028!

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

How dare you rack Dr Cherry Blossom so low. SHE STRIPPED HER WAY THROUGH MED SCHOOL

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah that's an incredibly good point.

[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 months ago

Yup, just gotta build up the movement and educate people so they can pressure the politicians.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Tier zoo has entered the chat

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I just watched the Turtle list the other day haha

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Fuck you Betty, Sue is my #1 MySpace friend!

[–] mjhelto@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

And we have fucking computers to do most of the heavy lifting!

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 40 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] Cosmos7349@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago

LOOOOUD NOISES

[–] Red_October@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago (2 children)

And yet here in Alaska there's a concerted effort to eliminate Ranked Choice Voting, I can only assume by people who are upset at the establishment losing some of it's grip.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 4 months ago

Status gonna quo

[–] Branch_Ranch@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Ranked choice is already banned in 10 red states BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY'D FUCKIN LOSE!

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 months ago (1 children)

RCV: It's voting, but you get to be more judgemental.

There. Marketing for a sizeable portion of the electorate to get on board with it.

[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Tier list voting

[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sorry about the caps. It’s the title of the article.

[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

IT’S OKAY. WE UNDERSTAND.

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Ngl, I struggle with how the votes are tallied and have to think about it for way longer than I should to understand it.

I'm embarrassed to admit that.

[–] cakeistheanswer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

If you dive into the theory at all about how ranked choice systems are gamed I think everyone is doomed for a headache.

Don't feel bad, it's infinitely better than what we have broadly, but it demands a lot more of the average voter if you're not voting a party ticket. If you're struggling you're doing it right.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It varies between implementations, here's a rough example for how the concept works (details may differ)

It's important to emphasize that in each step each ballot only counts for one candidate.

First you count 1st choice votes. If there's already a winner here then you're done. Second choices don't matter if a majority already agree on a first choice.

If not (eg. if no candidate has above 50%) then you eliminate the least popular candidates first. Once a candidate has been eliminated, any ballot with the eliminated candidate as 1st gets transferred to the 2nd choice candidate.

Consider the US election - if your first choice is a 3rd party candidate instead of the 2 well known ones, they're probably not getting a lot of votes. Once it's determined your 1st choice can't win and they're eliminated, your 2nd choice on the ballot is counted instead. This stacks on top of the not-eliminated 1st choice votes from the first step.

Why does this matter politically?

Because of say Trump gets 48% 1st choice votes, Biden gets 40% 1st choice and then 12% 2nd choice votes = 52% total and a win, then that's a powerful signal about which alternative candidates can become viable and a powerful method of expressing discontent with the primary candidate despite being willing to vote for "the lesser of two evils". You can express your first preference without giving a bad candidate a bigger chance to win.

Another interesting feature is that it's possible to win a majority of votes being 2nd choice votes, but that's really only likely if there's many candidates and 1 candidate that most finds acceptable but not preferred, because all the ones that are preferred by a few but disliked by most gets disqualified one by one until all those votes has gotten transferred to the broadly acceptable candidate

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

WOOOOO YEAH BABY

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ahh yes but what was their second choice on those points?

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

well... doesn't matter, ranked choice hit the threshold. ;-)

ranked choice voting will help save whats left of american democracy.

[–] Doom4535@lemmy.sdf.org -5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Do they say what state or are we supposed to just know this is Virginia?

[–] Coach@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago

Across Virginia and nationwide, voters say they like RCV and want to expand it.

Not the clearest, but it's in there.

[–] Doom4535@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 4 months ago

Darn, I missed it, about halfway down

[–] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 4 months ago

In a strange quirk, it was actually every city in the U.S. named Arlington at the same time.

~Disclaimer:~ ~I~ ~am~ ~lying.~