Posted on 11/27/2018 8:34:15 AM PST by SMGFan
The Maine Republican would be required to personally foot the bill
Ranked-choice voting has a dedicated foe in defeated Rep. Bruce Poliquin.
The Maine Republican called for a hand recount of ballots cast in the race for the 2nd District — the first election in the nation to use ranked-choice voting to fill a congressional seat — decrying the software used to allocate voters’ preferences as a “black-box voting system.”
“No one is able to review the algorithm used by a computer to determine elections,” Poliquin campaign spokesman Brendan Conley said in a statement Monday night. “This artificial intelligence is not transparent.” After Election Day, Poliquin led member-elect Jared Golden by less than one percentage point on the first count. But when neither candidate received a 50 percent share of the vote, the state’s ranked-choice voting system kicked in.
(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...
So let’s get this straight, the last place losers vots get awarded to the first loser until the first loser wins, right?
A conservative Maine political guy pointed out that the ranked choice results issued in this election don’t add up.
The DIMs have many, many ways to cheat.
His real beef is that a machine learning algorithm (i.e. a computer) is making the determination of what a voter’s 2nd, 3rd and 4th choices were. Does seem to be rife for mischief.
This “system” worked just like the left wanted it to.
How is ranked choice voting constitutional?
states can decide how to elect? ie some have run off for federal races … GA, MS
this is called instant runoff.
In Ca top 2 finishers in June primary go to November locking GOP out in many races.
I live in Maine.
GOP Congressman Bruce Poliquin received 2,000 more votes than his democrat challenger, liberal former Marine Jared Golden, a state rep from Lewiston, Maine.
Neither candidate received 50.1% of the vote or more....they each received 46% of the vote.
There were two “independents” in the running....Tiffany Bond, whoever she is, and William Hoar, whoever he is. Together, they received 8% of the vote.
There were four “ovals” the voter had to fill in with their pencil...1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, and 4th choice.
I only filled in my first choice, for Congressman Bruce Poliquin, and didn’t fill in the other ovals.
Same deal for the U.S. Senate seat....I filled in the “oval” for the challenger, State Senator Eric Brakey, a 30-year old who was challenging incumbent so-called “independent” Angus King. Eric Brakey successfully introduced the bill giving Maine Constitutional Carry. Angus King won more than 50.1% of the vote. Another guy running as a dem received 10%.
When tabulating the voting cards by machine, there were enough “second choice” ovals filled in for challenger democrat Jared Golden in the Congressional district race to give him 50.1% of the vote, making him the “winner,” even though the GOP candidate received more votes. This process took over a week.
A court has ruled that this system violates the Maine Constitution, where a plurality is required, so “rank choice” was not allowed for the governor’s race or any other state race.
The judge ruled that the federal Constitution does allow “rank choice” for federal races, since a plurality is not mentioned. Congressman Poliquin is challenging this in court, with a hearing scheduled for Dec. 5th.
Meanwhile, he ponied up $5,000 for a hand recount of 300,000 votes. If successful, he gets his money back....if not, he has to pay more.
Maine’s 2nd CD voted “no” when rank choice voting was on the ballot; the more liberal 1st CD put it over the top.
Yeah, states have their own election law. But states can’t have laws that disenfranchise voters which, to my mind anyway, is what ranked choice does.
Jeez louise, why hasn’t anyone tested this in court?!
Why wouldn’t it be, unless a state constitution explicitly bans it?
Ranked choice is simply an “instant” application of the idea of a series of run-off elections, where after each round, the worst vote-getter is eliminated, and those voters get to choose their next-best candidate, and they continue until one candidate has more than 50% of the vote.
In some states, they eliminate all but the top two candidates, and then have another election a month later. This allows people to make a more informed choice between the last two standing candidates, and eliminates the votes of people who really didn’t care about those candidates, who won’t show up again.
Ranked choice just makes sure that we collect all the votes for the voters that actually show up.
The problem with ranked choice is mostly that it is a game theory operation, and major party candidates need to learn how to play the game.
In this election, the republicans needed to find a fringe candidate. You can find some good constitutional conservative, or a decent libertarian who is economically conservative. Frankly it can be a racist, sexist, or any other weirdo (the two minor candidates on the ballot in this election were far-left wackos). The idea is to do this without fingerprints. It draws additional voters out who are likely to pick your main republican candidate as a 2nd or 3rd choice. The goal is to increase turnout of people who might be willing to throw their vote your way.
In this election, those two other candidates were both far-left, which gave their secondary votes to the democrat.
In fact, it is likely that over half the voters who showed up did NOT want the republican to win.
OR, the republican might be right, about how THIS election picked the 2nd/3rd choices, I presumed the voters had to explicitly identify their other choices, and that the computer was properly programed, but it sounds like there are questions about that.
not sure how many candidates due to ranking. This can be the case but the Nancy boys & Girls could refuse to seat him? maybe this race can be forced court ordered into a real runoff next year?
Uh, the courts have already ruled one man, one vote.
But then, there are the Obama judges.
It’s an equal protection violation cause the minor candidate supporters all got to vote twice essentially, but what about Polquin voters, surely most of them would prefer one off the indies to a rat but they don’t get the option of getting their votes redistributed.
Manifestly unfair. If they want they can have a runoff so EVERYONE gets to vote twice but not this crap.
Ranked choice voting is a liberal Hobby horse, and their love for it it just reinforces their view that they’re smarter than the rest of us. Much of the electorate is not sophisticated and likely to be confused. If the whole thrust of voting is to make it easy for every uninformed moron to get registered and to vote, and if the slow witted and uninformed are a key part of the rat constituency, adding complexity to the system seems antithetical (though it paid off here.)
A vote for a second candidate is a vote AGAINST your candidate in the second round!
Thank you for the through explanation. How can this even be an issue? Maine’s Supreme Court has already issued an advisory opinion that ranked voting violates the State Constitution.
This seems to be the Democrats’ self-contradictory position:
1) Maine law governs how Maine conducts its US Congressional elections (and thus can establish a ranked voting scheme); but,
2) Maine’s State Constitution does not govern Maine law when it applies to federal elections in Maine, including on issues where federal law is silent.
But Maine’s laws, including election laws, must comply with Maine’s Constitution. The US Constitution and federal law neither explicitly require nor prohibit ranked voting, thereby leaving it to the States. Maine’s Constitution requires a plurality, so ranked voting cannot be legal in elections in Maine, short of a State Constitutional amendment.
What am I missing here? Is there some reason why Poliquin filed his suit in federal court, when the State Supreme Court is the obvious venue?
The left is trying to pull a similar thing up here in BC with “Proportional Representation”.
With what I’ve learned about PR it appears to end up with the major population centers deciding elections, with rural areas amalgamated into nonsensical mega-ridings whose residents are disenfranchised.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.