591
submitted 3 days ago by todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Montagge@lemmy.zip 80 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Well Oregon also voted down RCV statewide because it's just too confusing lol

[-] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 73 points 3 days ago

The UK did this about a decade ago by a 2-to-1 margin, on the same grounds. Commentators in Australia (which have had ranked choice voting for generations) quipped that this was final proof that Australians are smarter than Brits.

[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago

Our legislature passed RCV here in CA and our Dem governor vetoed it. Can't be electing progressives over more big money neoliberal Dems, gotta keep that voting power bloc intact

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 34 points 3 days ago

This type of shit is exactly why Trump got reelected. The party is run by a bunch of charlatans.

[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They're good at representing their constituents all right. Sadly their only constituents are people donating to their campaigns.

Did Newsom take a rightward lean once he started getting groomed for a president run or has he always been this bad? I feel like every time I hear about him nationally hes doing something scummy like that or rounding up homeless people.

[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

I want to say he's always tilted in that direction, he was equally unloved as SF's mayor. He's old money, he's always looked out for his caste's interests.

Was it too confusing or did someone spend a lot of money playing ads that kept saying it was too confusing I wonder. I'd actually love to hear what the local ads and media around that ballot measure were like if anyone is local to Oregon.

[-] HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It wasn't so much confusing as it was over saturated, like not even half the candidates had statements in the voter pamphlet and many didnt respond to questionnaires or anything. City council was even worse, my district had the entire back of the page filled with candidates like 20+ names.

I'm someone that likes to take time and research candidates, I'm all for choice, I'd rather have it than not, but I can certainly see how it turned people off of the idea, perhaps intentionally.

[-] shutz@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

In a recent by-election I voted in, the ballots were 2-3 feet long with 91 candidates on them. This was in Canada, where we only have paper ballots. The majority of the candidates only registered as part of a protest to get the govt. to reconsider other voting methods than FPTP.

[-] HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

Woah! And I thought we had it bad here. There has to be a way to set some kind of reasonable barrier for entry

[-] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 days ago

I used to be more lenient, but it's 2024 and people running for elected political offices with ZERO online presence just pisses me off. I know this is gonna blow everyone's mind, but a large percentage of voters wait till the day before election to research any candidates, sometimes for less than an hour before giving up. It's probably why most of them don't fill out information so a voter just chooses them and they're less likely to dissuade someone if they don't say anything, at least it might've worked in the past.

It needs to be a required special-credit for highschool graduation to fully research and demonstrate you know the candidates on the ballet for your local election and register to vote. This could be bi-partisan, get everyone involved. It doesn't take fully re-working a shafted education system to get more engaged voters.

I'm just kinda miffed by the whole situation with Oregon, first the drug re-criminalization and now a RCV vote just got squashed. Can't wait to hear about everything that went down like with Alaska and Maine.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

not even half the candidates had statements in the voter pamphlet and many didnt respond to questionnaires or anything.

That has been annoyingly common in elections all over the place for as long as I can remember.

You went to the effort of getting on the ballot, but you can't be bothered to answer any questions or even tell people why they should vote for you?

[-] chowdertailz@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

Am Oregonian, I didn't see any ads about RCV. Plenty of ads about other measures and local candidates. Presidential race didn't bother spending money on us as Portland, Salem, Eugene out number the rest of the state and generally vote dem.

[-] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Wild, thanks for the input, think im gonna try and read a little more about this and other rcv initiatives. Would love to be able to understand how they pass and fail in case my state decides to put it on the ballot in the future.

this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
591 points (100.0% liked)

News

23296 readers
3139 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS