'Ranked Voting'.

Yakuda said:
Lmfao the founders were smarter than you fucking leftists cunts. They knew cunts have always existed and always will and that's why we have the EC.
Click to expand...

In national elections, the GOP has not been able to consistently convince a majority-plurality of voters of the superiority of their ideas since the mid to late 20th century.

Whatever the founders were doing, they certainly did not intend to create a tyranny of the minority*.


* of eligible voters
 
Cypress said:
In national elections, the GOP has not been able to consistently convince a majority-plurality of voters of the superiority of their ideas since the mid to late 20th century.

Whatever the founders were doing, they certainly did not intend to create a tyranny of the minority*.


* of eligible voters
Click to expand...

But they did intend to prevent a tyranny of the majority. There is no other reason for the EC. Without it new York and California would elect presidents. That's hardly a representation of all of America. Leftists are like the kid we had in my neighborhood growing up. Everytime the rules worked against him winning he wanted to change the rules. It was most hilarious when we would play baseball. If his team had fewer runs than the other team after the 9th inning he would demand we keep playing. Lmfao. I can't tell you how many times we just left him there screaming. Good memories.
 
Jack said:
OK. Thanks. The concept is so new to me I don't know how to digest it yet. I've never seen it in actual use. So this Election in NYC will be a learning experience for me. Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...

What I like most about it, is it completely eliminates the need for an expensive and unnecessary runoff of any primary!

It would have probably eliminated the idiot Donald Trump from the primaries before the very first national REPUBLICAN debate!

Because as I remember- he started out at the very bottom of the Republican list and only gained attention when he came out as a slasher during the debate- AND THE REPUBLICANS SAID- "I WANT THIS SLASHER AND PSYCHO IDIOT TO BE MY PRESIDENT"!

And then the cluster fuck, BRAINFARTS, and snowball TRUMPTARD effect happened!
 
Cypress said:
In national elections, the GOP has not been able to consistently convince a majority-plurality of voters of the superiority of their ideas since the mid to late 20th century.

Whatever the founders were doing, they certainly did not intend to create a tyranny of the minority*.


* of eligible voters
Click to expand...

Agreed. The Republican Party has been on a downward course to Authoritarianism since Jerry Falwell and Newt.

The "Tea Party" on 1/6 was just the latest new chapter. I strongly doubt many State and Federal politicians and workers want to see a repeat performance.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
LOL. What year do you expect that to happen? ;)

Let's not forget that it takes 38 States to ratify an Amendment. Which of these states below you think would support eliminating the Electoral College?

IMO, ranking is a faster track.

5e9hcq.jpg
Click to expand...

I am old enough to remember that in 2000 when polling showed it looked like Al Gore might win the EC while losing the popular vote, Team Bush was expressing outrage and challenging whether that would actually be a legitimate Gore victory.

On election night 2012, Trump was rage tweeting about the unfairness that, based on early returns, he thought Obama would win the EC while losing the pop vote to Romney.

So yes, I think we are one election away from Republicans decisively winning the popular vote while being denied the presidency due to the EC, for a constitutional amendment to be a real possibility
 
Cypress said:
I am old enough to remember that in 2000 when polling showed it looked like Al Gore might win the EC while losing the popular vote, Team Bush was expressing outrage and challenging whether that would be a legitimate Gore victory.

On election night 2012, Trump was rage tweeting about the unfairness that, based on early returns, he thought Obama would win the EC while losing the pop vote

So yes, I think we are one election away from Republicans decisively winning the popular vote while being denied the presidency due to the EC, for a constitutional amendment to be a real possibility
Click to expand...

Ranking would have knocked out Nader and seen Gore as the clear winner just like ranking would have knocked out Perot and seen GHW Bush as the clear winner in 1992.

Disagreed that a popular vote loss by the Republicans will see a huge swing in Red States ratifying eliminating the EC. Most know the population increases are mainly in the cities.

Hillary's infamous "3 million votes" were on the West Coast, one or two states. Eliminating the EC means the most populous states dictate the leadership of the USA to all smaller states.
 
Cypress said:
In national elections, the GOP has not been able to consistently convince a majority-plurality of voters of the superiority of their ideas since the mid to late 20th century.

Whatever the founders were doing, they certainly did not intend to create a tyranny of the minority*.


* of eligible voters
Click to expand...

:thinking: IMHO some of them certainly did...

You add to that jim crow's filibuster & there yea have it..
 
Cypress said:
In national elections, the GOP has not been able to consistently convince a majority-plurality of voters of the superiority of their ideas since the mid to late 20th century.

Whatever the founders were doing, they certainly did not intend to create a tyranny of the minority*.


* of eligible voters
Click to expand...

Preventing a tyranny of a majority or a minority was the intent. Should Americans be allowed to be stripped of their rights simply because 50.0001% say so?
 
Bill said:
:thinking: IMHO some of them certainly did...

You add to that jim crow's filibuster & there yea have it..
Click to expand...

People in power are reluctant to give up that power. This is why I strongly believe that by giving the Feds more power, we are cutting our own throats in the long run.
 
The bookkeeping can be long and laborious. If nobody hits 50 percent plus one, they go to the ballots of the last place candidate and his second-ranked vote is counted and his first eliminated. If you have a lot of candidates it could take a month or more. Every vote will have to be rescanned.
 
Jack said:
"Ranked voting
Ranked voting, also known as ranked-choice voting or preferential voting, is any election voting system in which voters use a ranked ballot to select more than one candidate and to rank these choices in a sequence on the ordinal scale of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.Wikipedia"

Is this a good idea?
Click to expand...


Yes. New York city is using it for the mayor's race.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Preventing a tyranny of a majority or a minority was the intent. Should Americans be allowed to be stripped of their rights simply because 50.0001% say so?
Click to expand...

Of course, but we do not go by popular vote, They are not stripping people of their rights. What is un-American is gerrymandering giving the reds seats that they do not deserve. The Dems are almost 55 percent in Mich and they never get the house majority due to gerrymandering. That Is not Democracy in action.
 
Jack said:
"Ranked voting
Ranked voting, also known as ranked-choice voting or preferential voting, is any election voting system in which voters use a ranked ballot to select more than one candidate and to rank these choices in a sequence on the ordinal scale of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.Wikipedia"

Is this a good idea?
Click to expand...

Why is it bad??

Mitt was everyone in the gop 4th choice..

There have been many times when a compromise candidate was put to the top of the tix because the big boys could not agree on their boy/girls not getting it.....

Difference here seems to be on who is making the call, the voters or the power brokers in the "smoke filled back rooms"......................??
 
Jack said:
"Ranked voting
Ranked voting, also known as ranked-choice voting or preferential voting, is any election voting system in which voters use a ranked ballot to select more than one candidate and to rank these choices in a sequence on the ordinal scale of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.Wikipedia"

Is this a good idea?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
Nordberg said:
Of course, but we do not go by popular vote, They are not stripping people of their rights. What is un-American is gerrymandering giving the reds seats that they do not deserve. The Dems are almost 55 percent in Mich and they never get the house majority due to gerrymandering. That Is not Democracy in action.
Click to expand...
I don't like gerrymandering or the screwing around with voting rights, but what they were talking about is getting rid of the EC. First, I doubt such an amendment would pass and, second, it's a really bad idea.

Ranking is easier and can be done by each state. I think it is fair and will be a popular idea.

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/22/1008807504/ranked-choice-voting-new-york-city-mayors-race
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top