Why Republicans are rallying against ‘woke’ ranked-choice voting

Washington Examiner ^ | 7/03/21 | Emily Brooks

[Libloather]

Frustration over delays and tabulation mishaps in New York’s Democratic mayoral primary is fueling a wave of Republican opposition to an increasingly popular election structure change.

Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton called it a “corrupt scam.” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy dinged it as “woke.” New York Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney argued that it “disenfranchises” voters.

Jason Snead, executive director of the conservative-leaning Honest Elections Project, said ranked-choice voting is a “solution in search of a problem.”

**SNIP**

Ranked-choice voting, also called an automatic runoff, is a system of relocating votes from bottom-tier candidates in races with at least three candidates to subsequent preferences until one candidate reaches at least 50% of the vote. According to FairVote, the system is used in two states, one county, 26 cities outside of Utah, and 23 Utah cities.

Advocates argue that ranked-choice voting could eliminate anger over the “spoiler effect” that independent candidates sometimes have and may lead to friendlier campaigning, as well as save money on runoff election costs. Most systems allow winners to be chosen with a simple plurality, though some systems, including Georgia's, mandate runoff elections if no candidate wins a majority.

[Libloather]

Just read that Denver maybe switching over.

[BenLurkin]

Democrat Party lusts for One Party Rule.

Democrat Party ADMIRES Red China.

[Chode]

RCV is voting more than the once allowed per person by law.

[lasereye]

Advocates argue that ranked-choice voting could eliminate anger over the “spoiler effect” that independent candidates sometimes have

That is a problem. How many times have Libertarian candidates enabled the Dem to win? But runoffs take care of that.

[livius]

Poor Denver.

Everybody should be rallying against RCV. Even the leftists are complaining about it in NYC after last week’s complete screw-up.

I don’t know who thinks it’s a good idea. It can take weeks just to find out who won.

[Nextrush]

Its about establishing the supremacy of the big parties.

Third party votes are whittled into the big parties in Australia by this kind of voting down there in general elections.

[brianl703]

The Republican Party of Virginia used ranked-choice voting to nominate statewide offices this year.

As far as I know there were no problems with it.

[Political Junkie Too]

Has anybody run simulations that test how to game the system so that the primary vote goes to the least desirable but the second vote goes to the real desired candidate?

Is it possible to run a Dark Horse campaign with this tactic to ensure that the second vote actually wins?

-PJ

[Leaning Right]

> How many times have Libertarian candidates enabled the Dem to win? But runoffs take care of that. <

I agree with you. As I see it, runoffs and ranked voting are, in general, a good thing.

[ncalburt]

Commie Emily Brooks peddling this Left Wing con thinks she is real smart .
Notice how the Commie uses the term Popular .
When in fact its a Huge Organized Effort lead by Cali Socialists Groups to ram this this thru everywhere funded by trust fund lear jet leftists .
Fellow Commie Emily ignores reporting that FACT .
Lefty Emily somehow forgets FL voters shot this commie idea down a few years ago .
Comrade Emily its not that popular .

This sociopath peddling half truths are now working at the Never Trumper
Examiner .

[Robert DeLong]

Republicans are rallying against ‘woke’ ranked-choice voting

Well, that would be a first for modern Republicans to rally around anything other than their own personal power. Perhaps that is what this is really about.

[Libloather]

It can take weeks just to find out who won.

Uh, oh. Iowa was just warmup.

[ncalburt]

Hell No .

This scam insures no Gop candidate will ever win .

This scam is funded across the country by Lear jet leftist trust fund Demo Rats .

Stop being so naive .

A Cali socialist group tried to ram this thru on FL .
Thank god it was voted down .

[ncalburt]

Stalin

Its not who votes but who counts the votes .

Commie 101. - Demand Rank Voting .

[Leaning Right]

> This scam insures no Gop candidate will ever win. <

Please explain, and maybe give an example.

[ncalburt]

You haven't figured it out yet .
The Lefty funds a sea of phony Gop candidates and splits the Gop side and the left has one option nationwide .
The left have the big money now .

How do you think Linda Grahnesty gets reelected .

[bigbob]

If they are, it’s only because Republicans haven’t figured out how to use it to their advantage yet.

[ncalburt]

And they will never will.
The stupid party .

The Rich commies are funding the rank voting in every state they can for this reason .

They have no religion but political power .

[Rurudyne]

It’s like proverbial multiple hanging chads per vote … what could possibly go wrong?

[Leaning Right]

> The Lefty funds a sea of phony Gop candidates and splits the Gop side and the left has one option nationwide. The left have the big money now. <

I agree! But then wouldn’t ranked voting or a run-off minimize that?

Here’s an example. Let’s say that a true conservative is running against a true liberal. But there’s a third candidate. Maybe he’s a phony conservative. Or maybe he’s an earnest libertarian.

The phony conservative or the libertarian is going to siphon votes away from the true conservative. So the liberal is more likely to win. But ranked voting or a runoff would make that much less likely.

By the way, I’m aware that this is a two-edged sword. Instead of a phony conservative or a libertarian, the third candidate could be a far-left radical. In that case ranked voting or a runoff would hurt the conservative candidate.

I guess the bottom line, for me anyway, is that (for better or worse) the majority should get its way. Ranked voting or a runoff would help that.