卄乇ㄥㄥ ㄚ乇卂卄
I’m getting wasted and calling in sick to 2/3 jobs tomorrow to celebrate.
Funny how I find out all this now. just a few days ago I just switched my preference from RCV to STAR voting. Still, Ranked Choice voting would definitely still be a improvement.
Just imagine how much time blue conservatives would save from spamming every thread on the green party!
Shout out to GroundedGator@lemmy.world who showed me this comparison of RCV vs STAR voting
“We’ve seen legislatures ban ranked choice voting in several states, but ballot measures seem to have a mind of their own,” Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project and an opponent of ranked choice voting, told The Daily Signal.
“There has been massive spending on some of these initiatives.” Snead said. “People are actually seeing a small cabal of donors that want to weaken political parties. Progressive donors want to take control of the political process at the expense of political parties.”
YES. WE KNOW. THATS THE POINT EXACTLY. WE DON’T LIKE YOU, AND WE DON’T LIKE YOUR PARTIES. YOU ALL SUCK.
In most states, supporters and opponents of ranked choice voting don’t break down along traditional party lines. In several states, in fact, both the Democratic and Republican parties oppose the process.
I have a Google alert set up for RCV, and the number of weird propaganda editorials that pop up with some kind of weird argument for why RCV is a terrible thing, is a really icky look into how much the ruling classes hate RCV, and how they try to manipulate public opinion about it.
Much of the funding driving the marquee ballot questions is coming from large, out-of-state groups — many of whom do not disclose their donors — that are working to advance these policies via ballot measures in multiple states and are fueling high-dollar TV ad blitzes.
I do take some pleasure in the fact that they can’t even pretend that abortion and RCV aren’t good ideas, in any way that they think even American voters will be convinced by. I think that means we’re making progress.
Ah shit they cut off Ross Perot smashing his hat in disbelief. :(
The depressing thing is, that’s completely true. That’s why RCV is important.
It’s not a cure-all but it’s a hell of lot better than FPTP.
The Simpsons, back when it was actually good, predicted so many things so accurately. It’s pretty crazy.
I like the idea of ranked choice voting but it’s not perfect.
Corporate dems and republicans can and will unite together to support each other rather than progressives or other third parties
I’m banning you, not because this comment is wrong, although it is. I looked at your history, and you’re clearly a one-note trumpet.
- Kamala Harris = Gaza
- ACA = bad, Obama = bad
- “neoliberals”
- “blue maga”
I stopped reading at that point, which was about halfway down the page. Take it somewhere else.
I’m not sure that a user’s comment history should be banworthy.
There are dozens of accounts on Lemmy that almost exclusively focus on tying any particular topic that’s being discussed back around to why the Democrats are bad. This person is one of them.
Ranked Choice voting? Democrats and Republicans are basically the same, they’re your enemy.
Kamala Harris did good in her interview? She’s in Israel’s pocket.
Obama said something? The ACA was awful.
I have no idea what this person’s deal is, but I don’t really care. If you want good politics things, then LFG, that’s what this community is for. If you want to behave like a Heritage Foundation paid social media influence operation, I’m going to treat you accordingly. I think most of Lemmy’s moderation teams are way too lenient on these chuckleheads.
What’s wrong about their comment?
It seems to be implying that ranked choice voting is going to be defeated or weakened by Democrats and Republicans banding together to defeat anything progressive. The words sounds right, and scan together coherently, and this combined with a bunch of other messages can lead someone through constant repetition to an overall vague impression that Democrats = bad, but it doesn’t actually make any sense.
When are Democrats and Republicans going to band together? Have they done that to unseat Bernie Sanders, or are they unified in opposing Jill Stein and making sure to keep her out of power? The current administration of Republicans doesn’t want it to be legal for Democrats to win elections at all. They’re not suddenly going to be okay with the idea of handing over power to a D because there’s a third party in the race.
Even if they did unite to defeat a progressive, how would that work under an RCV system? The whole idea of RCV is that you can vote for a third party without the math underlying FPTP elections making it impossible for them to win. The Ds and Rs can unite around their common corporate candidate, and then the third-party person is basically running against that person, and the majority vote-getter is going to win, unlike now where you have a choice of two corporate candidates and that’s functionally it. Isn’t that… better?
Just posting a comment that I think is wrong, I don’t have a problem with. It was only when I looked back at their history and found that it’s all “no Democrats” all the time and more or less nothing else that I decided they were some breed of misinformation and could go.
Ah, I see. I interpreted it as two independent statements because your interpretation didn’t make sense. But now that I think about it, it looks like they did mean it in the incorrect way.
Especially when put in the context of everything else they have to say.
The single comment alone would have irked me but I wouldn’t have banned them just for the one statement alone. I probably just would have said something. The pattern of commenting to always lead to one particular conclusion, and that conclusion coincidentally lining up with probably the number 1 active form of disinformation on the internet right now, means GTFO.
