83 points

“Ranked choice voting” is a misleading term for Alternative Vote or Instant Runoff Voting. There are many ranked choice voting systems and the most important is Single Transferrable Vote, which is a popular system of proportional representation.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Isn’t ranked choice just the single candidate version? Like, you don’t get proportional representation with a presidential election

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You can elect multiple reps, the quota threshold is just different

Importantly you do need the multi member districts to get the full benefit of these kinds of voting systems and prevent duvergers law

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

In political science, Duverger’s law (/ˈduvərʒeɪ/ DOO-vər-zhay) holds that in political systems with only one winner (as in the U.S.), two main parties tend to emerge with minor parties typically splitting votes away from the most similar major party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

I don’t remember the name of it, but I really liked the one that weighed in disapproval. It’s similar to RCV, with a very important difference.

Like standard RCV, after a count that doesn’t result in a majority of voters with the same top-ranked candidate they eliminate a candidate.

But instead of removing the candidate with the least top-ranked votes, it removes the candidate with the most bottom-ranked votes.

The result is a system that trends away from a hyper-polarized 2-party system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Oh I like this. Anyone got the name for it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The result is that name recognition and bold statements are detrimental to getting elected. The result is that the most milquetoast , no-name, do nothings are who gets elected.

I get that people are dissatisfied with the current system. That doesn’t make literally anything else better.

These alternative voting systems are not the silver bullet that people think they are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points
*

American people don’t have a federal holiday on elections, am I right?

Edit: I didn’t mean federal holiday. Just a holiday that’s mandatory to follow even for private firms.

permalink
report
reply
37 points

That’s correct. It’s just a normal weekday.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Makes it easier for the richer people with flexible jobs and the retirees with no jobs to vote.

3 guesses which party is always against making it a federal holiday…

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

But a federal holiday doesn’t really help though right? People working at Wendy’s don’t get existing federal holidays off so it wouldn’t change for the majority of people who can’t get to the polling stations because of what job they have.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

A political party that wants to make it harder to vote for politicians… Gee I wonder!

Fortunately I have a flexible job and live in a small town, but it looks like it gets ridiculous in other parts of the country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Hell, they could just hold it over a weekend. Why does it need to be just one day, let alone a weekday (or more importantly, a work day)?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

Utterly insane that elections are held on weekdays. I’m so thankful we have mandatory voting, easy early voting, voting by mail, elections on weekends, and protections for employees who need to vote on the day they if they’re working in Australia. We also already have ranked choice voting by single transferable vote as well as proportional representative voting in most jurisdictions (all bicameral parliaments).

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Unfortunately we have a beyond-uncomfortable fraction of the population that are totally cool with trying to prevent/discourage people from voting, as long as the near term political benefit is in their favor.

But I’m still glad to hear about other governments doing things for the good of the people. One of these days maybe enough of the US population will realize we can implement things that worked in other countries!

Just have to convince them that other countries exist…

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Honestly the election day thing is more of an excuse at this point. Really, you get like a month or maybe two weeks to put your vote in. Most people who didn’t vote just don’t care.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

ACT is unicameral, and I don’t think we’re the only ones

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I mean even federal holidays don’t help. At least for the lower classes since businesses are not forced to follow said holidays. It may be good for federal/government workers but from the private sector it will mean very little.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

In Australia pre-polling places open like 2 weeks in advance. (I don’t know the exact number but you don’t have to vote on election day if you can’t make it on election day)

And election day is always a Saturday.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

But I am not talking about federal holidays. I am talking about holidays in both the private and government sector for elections. That’s a fairly reasonable/old law in many countries including mine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Not in Canada either, but we do have a special holiday for Truth and Reconciliation where our Aboriginal peoples are acknowledged through ceremonial water skiing in Tofino

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Voting is not governed on the federal level. That power is reserved to the states. Most reasonable states have 30+ days of early voting. The people complaining about no federal holiday for voting have probably never voted. If your state does not have early voting then get on that shit and stop bitching online.

Having most governance at the state level is a good thing. You are 1 voice in a million instead of 1 voice in 300 million. It is easier for people to influence state government. State laws have a bigger impact on people’s lives.

If someone isn’t knowledgeable and involved in state politics but is posting online about politics then they are just another braying jackass doing nothing to fix things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Dude, have you considered the possibility that people canNOT be Americans also?

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

RCV does have a name recognition and a perceived ‘hotness’ that other voting systems haven’t really matched. And in politics, name recognition matters. I think it is counter productive to attack it to push another voting system. Instead, imo it makes more sense to push the alternative voting system by comparing it to FPTP, our current voting system.

permalink
report
reply
41 points

Meanwhile the heritage foundation goes on and on about how this bad for freedoms lol

permalink
report
reply
22 points

As a general rule anything the Heritage Foundation supports you should probably be against, but it didn’t exactly solve all problems immediately in the countries, and yes, some US states, that have it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Just a reminder to people that the Heritage Foundation are the ones propagating the horrifying "Project 2025”(

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

The only people that it’s confusing for are those who fear a 3rd part option. Preference 1, preference 2 preference 3 is all the end voter needs to know. If they can handle the myriad of different ballot formats out there that’s not asking too much

permalink
report
reply
24 points

Yep. I have three brothers. My dad used ranked choice voting for us when we were kids all the time on “flavors” of things we needed to buy: ice cream, candy, toothpaste, etc. We understood it with no issues.

it was amusing seeing the look on a friend’s face when my dad would barge into the room with 5 different toothpastes and ask, “which of these do you like the best?” Followed shortly by “which of these do you like 2nd best?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Next step should be universal mail in voting. Ranking 3 or more choices per contest will make voting take twice as long or more and it will discourage people from voting when they see lines wrapped around the building.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’m actually surprised we don’t have more in the way of e-voting somehow. We file countless sensitive docs online each day including tax returns, and outside of the occasional technical glitches we don’t hear of massive complaints of fraud the way people go on about it with elections regardless of in person or by mail. Yeah, putting it all online has its risks, but it shouldn’t be impossible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

For most any sensitive document multiple parties can maintain their own copies and even encrypt them if they feel like it and there’s plenty of ways to verify their authenticity. This can’t as easily be applied to voting because you also want anonymity. Cryptographic systems do exist to provide a high level of confidence in integrity and anonymity but misapplication of any step of the process can completely ruin the entire thing. This happens in computer systems all the time. Seemingly secure programs suddenly have massive holes because a new exploit was discovered.

Paper systems are much more difficult to exploit or foul up. Obviously election mishaps happen all the time but I haven’t heard of any such that would alter an outcome AND do not get caught prior to certification.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 414K

    Comments