Can ranked-choice voting save American democracy? We ask an expert

First Soros then to the DNC, then to CNN ^ | Fredreka Schouten

[NoLibZone]

In this edition, we're focusing on a single big topic: ranked-choice voting. Some critics of the US election process argue that when most voters head to the polls in November, they don't really have much of a choice on their ballots.

That's because legislative and congressional districts have been carved up -- largely by politicians themselves -- to make the maps so heavily Republican or Democratic that the people who vote in primaries have effectively picked the general election winners. And that means die-hard partisan voters -- rather than the broader electorate -- exercise enormous sway over who holds elective office in this country. So, some places are taking a different route.

Q: First, the basics. Can you explain ranked-choice voting and where we'll see it play out in the upcoming midterm elections? In RCV, voters get to do more than simply vote for one candidate. They rank the candidates in the order they prefer them, and voters can typically rank as many candidates as they would like to. So if five candidates are running, voters can rank them 1-5. The system gives voters a way to express their views about a number of candidates, not just one.

If no candidate gets a majority of first-place votes, then a candidate is eliminated and the votes on the latter's ballot are then given to the candidates who were ranked second on those ballots. There are different versions of RCV under which the rules for determining which candidate gets eliminated vary, but in the version used thus far in the US, it's the candidate who gets the fewest first-place votes who is eliminated. So if I rank candidates A, B, C in that order, and candidate A is eliminated, my vote will then go to candidate B.

[NoLibZone]

How will this circumvent the conservative movement?
Thank you

[metmom]

It’s irrelevant if it can *save a democracy* because America is NOT a democracy.

The question is whether it is legal under a Constitutional Republic, and I think all it does it provide another means for cheating in elections.

[butlerweave]

Like New Zealand ? LOL

[traderrob6]

America is a Constitutionally mandated democratically elected representative Republic.....Next question.

[taxcontrol]

America is not now, nor ever has been a Democracy. It is a constitutional representative republic.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

It’s a variation of Democrats crossing over to the Republican Party in primary elections to vote for Assistant Democrats.

[McGavin999]

Voting is not a game. Rank choice voting IS a game.

[butlerweave]

I think Trudeau wanted this so it’s a very bad idea

[marktwain]

Ranked Choice voting has been a disaster in Australia and New Zealand.

Instead of offering clear choices of policy, it divides up the electorate into numerous factions.

The Media power is significantly enhanced.

It is a very bad idea.

[jdsteel]

How about no.

Or hell no.

My language can get stronger.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

If, as some believe, the majority of Americans are really conservative, then the consensus candidate will more often than not be conservative or conservative leaning.

However if the majority of Americans have been converted over to liberalism, then the winner will more often than not be liberal or liberal leaning.

As far as gaming the system goes, it would seem that the side with the fewer candidates will do best as they will split the vote less. So the other side would tend to add candidates that claimed to be conservative who really weren't.

Even though we don't have ranked voting in Cali I noticed a number of Republican Latino candidates for Senator that had websites that were essentially dead. The liberal Latino Democrat Senator running for reelection may have been afraid that he could lose because more Latinos were voting Republican. However, by getting fake Republican Latinos to run he could siphon off whatever support the real Republican candidate would get from Latinos.

This would make it less likely for firebreathing conservatives to get in office and more RINOs and DINOs who would tend to agree on legislation that would slowly move us in a socialist direction.

The current system which tends to favor rightists and leftists with clear messages leads to a stalemate which at least slows and sometimes halts the inevitable slide to socialism.

[butlerweave]

Ya it sounds like diversity ,LOL

[ncfool]

It’s how they vote in California. How many Republicans do you see in statewide office in California. ZERO……
They are trying to get Missourians to buy into ranked voting. That would be a big big mistake

[nickcarraway]

Can ranked-choice voting destroy America?

[ncfool]

It’s how they vote in California. How many Republicans do you see in statewide office in California. ZERO……
They are trying to get Missourians to buy into ranked voting. That would be a big big mistake

[Olog-hai]

I reached out to Richard Pildes, a constitutional law professor at New York University’s School of Law — and one of the country's leading experts on election law and democracy — to explain the ins-and-outs of this option: ranked-choice voting or RCV, as he calls it. …

Sure would liked to have been able to find out the name without having to look at CNN’s vile bandwidth. Defended Sarbanes-Oxley before the SCOTUS.

(Pildes) is also an active public intellectual and has written frequently for the Washington Post, the New York Times, the New Republic, the American Prospect, The Hill, Politico, and other such publications. He was assisted with one of his casebooks by then-University of Chicago Law School professor Barack Obama. … — Wikipedia

Nothing says “useless human being” more than that sordid list of non-accomplishments.

[hinckley buzzard]

Ranked choice voting is based on a form of group decision making. If a group, let’s say a board of directors, is choosing a policy from among a set of alternatives, this can enhance the outcome. But it’s different with candidates for office, who are not passive choices but active agents in determining the outcome. Bad social engineering, leads to outcomes of questionable validity. Stupid for any state or municipality or other political entity to trust their future to it. Way too easy to manipulate.

[Secret Agent Man]

Correct.

Their premise is flawed.

[T.B. Yoits]

We don't have legitimate elections. We're forced to choose between the worst of two offered by the halves of the Uniparty.

If voting was effective it would be outlawed.

If the electorate was really in charge, EVERY election, from the local dog catcher to the President, would have a choice of "none of the above". If a candidate couldn't beat "none of the above"; good riddance.