• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Ranked-choice voting

Sounds like a never ending election. A direct democracy is the most accountable. You, theoretically, get what you vote for, right? What happens when everything you believe in is voted OUT??? What then? Ignore the election, consolidate power? Die Fahne hoch!
 
statler & waldorf said:
Sounds like a never ending election. A direct democracy is the most accountable. You, theoretically, get what you vote for, right? What happens when everything you believe in is voted OUT??? What then? Ignore the election, consolidate power? Die Fahne hoch!
Click to expand...

No sure I understand your response but thanks anyway.

It's actually contrary to a "never ending election" but then I won't go into details as I need to chew on the last part of your statement for the next year or so......
 
I had to read on the concept, know Maine will try it. Takes a lot more study to even consider it. A blind rush into the unknown is not a good idea. A democracy requires a informed electorate. People just don't give a damn anymore. As for being informed, it's getting worse. The last part of my post refers to a certain dictatorship. Once elected, no need for any damn elections. Let's see what Maine discovers from this experiment.
 
From what I read it worked well in Maine.

I just heard about this with what Maine was doing and was very surprised to see that it's used in quite a few places around the country. Maine is the only state so far that uses it state wide. Several cities in California use it as well.

http://www.fairvote.org/rcv#where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used

Certainly not going to disagree on your dictatorship comment.....
 
Interesting concept I believe some western countries use this and some localities in the US. It might break up the two party strangle hold. I just really don’t know enough about it to comment.
 
Dutch Lane said:
Interesting concept I believe some western countries use this and some localities in the US. It might break up the two party strangle hold. I just really don’t know enough about it to comment.
Click to expand...

My thoughts as well about breaking up the 2 party system. Maybe at least water it down a bit.

If you are interested look at this article...

http://www.fairvote.org/rcv#where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used

I'm not actively campaigning for this but was very surprised it existed when I first heard about it last week. So far I can see no downside.....
 
Ranked Choice Voting Draws Historic Voter Turnout in 2018 Midterms

https://ivn.us/2018/07/12/ranked-choice-voting-draws-historic-voter-turnout-2018-midterms/
 
VictorG said:
I like it. Where do we sign
Thoughts????.....
Click to expand...


What is wrong with being a Republic, and not being a Democracy, after all it has worked since it started and went into effect 1788 when the Constitution became the guiding path of the United States.

The framers meant it to be a Republic, and not a direct democracy, however, to be a representative democracy.

Progressives would love to have a direct democracy, for then flyover states would be irrelevant, and New York, and California, Illinois, and the rest of the left-leaning states would have the power. Case in point Clinton won the popular vote with just the overflow of California and New York.

So the suggestion is do away with the Constitution, and dismiss the Republic and representative democracy, which created the greatest nation in the world in lieu of direct democracy.

All that would take is an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate manipulated by corruption, propaganda, false promises by politicians, and in a decade or two, the US could become Venezuela.
 
spsyk said:
VictorG said:
I like it. Where do we sign
Thoughts????.....
Click to expand...


What is wrong with being a Republic, and not being a Democracy, after all it has worked since it started and went into effect 1788 when the Constitution became the guiding path of the United States.

The framers meant it to be a Republic, and not a direct democracy, however, to be a representative democracy.

Progressives would love to have a direct democracy, for then flyover states would be irrelevant, and New York, and California, Illinois, and the rest of the left-leaning states would have the power. Case in point Clinton won the popular vote with just the overflow of California and New York.

So the suggestion is do away with the Constitution, and dismiss the Republic and representative democracy, which created the greatest nation in the world in lieu of direct democracy.

All that would take is an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate manipulated by corruption, propaganda, false promises by politicians, and in a decade or two, the US could become Venezuela.
Click to expand...

Not sure where this response fits in with W.C. Fields quote, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” :lol:
 
VictorG said:
spsyk said:
VictorG said:
I like it. Where do we sign
Thoughts????.....
Click to expand...


What is wrong with being a Republic, and not being a Democracy, after all it has worked since it started and went into effect 1788 when the Constitution became the guiding path of the United States.

The framers meant it to be a Republic, and not a direct democracy, however, to be a representative democracy.

Progressives would love to have a direct democracy, for then flyover states would be irrelevant, and New York, and California, Illinois, and the rest of the left-leaning states would have the power. Case in point Clinton won the popular vote with just the overflow of California and New York.

So the suggestion is do away with the Constitution, and dismiss the Republic and representative democracy, which created the greatest nation in the world in lieu of direct democracy.

All that would take is an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate manipulated by corruption, propaganda, false promises by politicians, and in a decade or two, the US could become Venezuela.
Click to expand...

Not sure where this response fits in with W.C. Fields quote, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” :lol:
Click to expand...

When you can’t refute with facts, divert and show ignorance.
 
statler & waldorf said:
Sounds like a never ending election. A direct democracy is the most accountable. You, theoretically, get what you vote for, right? What happens when everything you believe in is voted OUT??? What then? Ignore the election, consolidate power? Die Fahne hoch!
Click to expand...

LOL! Obviously you have no idea what ranked-choice voting is.
 
spsyk said:
VictorG said:
I like it. Where do we sign
Thoughts????.....
Click to expand...


What is wrong with being a Republic, and not being a Democracy, after all it has worked since it started and went into effect 1788 when the Constitution became the guiding path of the United States.

The framers meant it to be a Republic, and not a direct democracy, however, to be a representative democracy.

Progressives would love to have a direct democracy, for then flyover states would be irrelevant, and New York, and California, Illinois, and the rest of the left-leaning states would have the power. Case in point Clinton won the popular vote with just the overflow of California and New York.

So the suggestion is do away with the Constitution, and dismiss the Republic and representative democracy, which created the greatest nation in the world in lieu of direct democracy.

All that would take is an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate manipulated by corruption, propaganda, false promises by politicians, and in a decade or two, the US could become Venezuela.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where we are going here. But, a Republic is fine if each state has the same proportional vote.
 
grizpsych said:
spsyk said:
VictorG said:
I like it. Where do we sign
Thoughts????.....
Click to expand...


What is wrong with being a Republic, and not being a Democracy, after all it has worked since it started and went into effect 1788 when the Constitution became the guiding path of the United States.

The framers meant it to be a Republic, and not a direct democracy, however, to be a representative democracy.

Progressives would love to have a direct democracy, for then flyover states would be irrelevant, and New York, and California, Illinois, and the rest of the left-leaning states would have the power. Case in point Clinton won the popular vote with just the overflow of California and New York.

So the suggestion is do away with the Constitution, and dismiss the Republic and representative democracy, which created the greatest nation in the world in lieu of direct democracy.

All that would take is an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate manipulated by corruption, propaganda, false promises by politicians, and in a decade or two, the US could become Venezuela.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where we are going here. But, a Republic is fine if each state has the same proportional vote.
Click to expand...


They do have a proportionate vote, larger states have more electoral votes, it called the electoral college, you got it.
 
spsyk said:
grizpsych said:
spsyk said:
VictorG said:
I like it. Where do we sign
Thoughts????.....
Click to expand...


What is wrong with being a Republic, and not being a Democracy, after all it has worked since it started and went into effect 1788 when the Constitution became the guiding path of the United States.

The framers meant it to be a Republic, and not a direct democracy, however, to be a representative democracy.

Progressives would love to have a direct democracy, for then flyover states would be irrelevant, and New York, and California, Illinois, and the rest of the left-leaning states would have the power. Case in point Clinton won the popular vote with just the overflow of California and New York.

So the suggestion is do away with the Constitution, and dismiss the Republic and representative democracy, which created the greatest nation in the world in lieu of direct democracy.

All that would take is an amendment to the Constitution, and the electorate manipulated by corruption, propaganda, false promises by politicians, and in a decade or two, the US could become Venezuela.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where we are going here. But, a Republic is fine if each state has the same proportional vote.
Click to expand...


They do have a proportionate vote, larger states have more electoral votes, it called the electoral college, you got it.
Click to expand...

They did have proportional voting, but the proportions are way out of wack now. Here are some examples.

Montana electoral votes = 3, Population = 1,050,000, 1 electoral vote per 350,000 people

Wyoming electoral votes = 3, Population = 579,315, 1 electoral vote per 193,105 people

Washington electoral votes = 12, Population = 7,406,000, 1 electoral vote per 617,167 people

Oregon electoral votes = 7, Population = 4,143,000, 1 electoral vote per 591,857 people

North Dakota electoral votes = 3, Population = 755,393, 1 electoral vote per 251,798 people

California electoral votes = 55, Population = 39,540,000, 1 electoral vote per 717,273 people

Shall I go on?
 
No need, get Congress to amend the Constitution, because you are going to wait a long time to have the Supreme Court to legislate that nonsense, which progressives love because that is the only way they can advance their agenda.

Fortunately the Electoral Congress is here to stay, even though you think it is out of whack
 
spsyk said:
No need, get Congress to amend the Constitution, because you are going to wait a long time to have the Supreme Court to legislate that nonsense, which progressives love because that is the only way they can advance their agenda.

Fortunately the Electoral Congress is here to stay, even though you think it is out of whack
Click to expand...

There is no need to amend the constitution. There are already processes to re-balance the electoral college. Indeed, Montana had 4 electoral votes when I was born.

Also, this is why you don't understand rank-choice voting. It has nothing to do with the electoral college, per se.

One last thing. Make no mistake, the only reason Republicans/conservatives have any power is through Gerrymandering of congressional districts and unequal vote representation in the electoral college. After all, more people are progressive than conservative in this country.
 
grizpsych said:
spsyk said:
No need, get Congress to amend the Constitution, because you are going to wait a long time to have the Supreme Court to legislate that nonsense, which progressives love because that is the only way they can advance their agenda.

Fortunately the Electoral Congress is here to stay, even though you think it is out of whack
Click to expand...

There is no need to amend the constitution. There are already processes to re-balance the electoral college. Indeed, Montana had 4 electoral votes when I was born.

Also, this is why you don't understand rank-choice voting. It has nothing to do with the electoral college, per se.

One last thing. Make no mistake, the only reason Republicans/conservatives have any power is through Gerrymandering of congressional districts and unequal vote representation in the electoral college. After all, more people are progressive than conservative in this country.
Click to expand...


Your per se argument doesn’t mean squat, get back to me when rank choice becomes law of the land, only the right is quilty of Gerrymandering, wasn’t aware of that.

Keep me posted on those processes to rebalance the electoral college.

For your uninformed information, the county is still center right, not left per Lexis Nexis, not some obscure web site or the comedy channel.

So what you are saying is there was no collision with the Russians, Trump kick Hilliary ass due to Gerrymandering.

Please inform the special council.
 
spsyk said:
grizpsych said:
spsyk said:
No need, get Congress to amend the Constitution, because you are going to wait a long time to have the Supreme Court to legislate that nonsense, which progressives love because that is the only way they can advance their agenda.

Fortunately the Electoral Congress is here to stay, even though you think it is out of whack
Click to expand...

There is no need to amend the constitution. There are already processes to re-balance the electoral college. Indeed, Montana had 4 electoral votes when I was born.

Also, this is why you don't understand rank-choice voting. It has nothing to do with the electoral college, per se.

One last thing. Make no mistake, the only reason Republicans/conservatives have any power is through Gerrymandering of congressional districts and unequal vote representation in the electoral college. After all, more people are progressive than conservative in this country.
Click to expand...


Your per se argument doesn’t mean squat, get back to me when rank choice becomes law of the land, only the right is quilty of Gerrymandering, wasn’t aware of that.

Keep me posted on those processes to rebalance the electoral college.

For your uninformed information, the county is still center right, not left per Lexis Nexis, not some obscure web site or the comedy channel.

So what you are saying is there was no collision with the Russians, Trump kick Hilliary ass due to Gerrymandering.

Please inform the special council.
Click to expand...
Dude. Ranked choice voting has absolutely nothing to do with the electoral college! Trump lost the popular vote. Montana had 4 electoral votes in 1988 and now has 3. Facts hurt spsyk's brain. Need anything else? Or should I simply name all of the logical fallacies in your last post?

Also, please learn the difference between council and counsel. You're as dumb as Trump. Words matter.

I do like the word quilty though. I admit I'm guilty of that.
 
grizpsych said:
spsyk said:
grizpsych said:
spsyk said:
No need, get Congress to amend the Constitution, because you are going to wait a long time to have the Supreme Court to legislate that nonsense, which progressives love because that is the only way they can advance their agenda.

Fortunately the Electoral Congress is here to stay, even though you think it is out of whack
Click to expand...

There is no need to amend the constitution. There are already processes to re-balance the electoral college. Indeed, Montana had 4 electoral votes when I was born.

Also, this is why you don't understand rank-choice voting. It has nothing to do with the electoral college, per se.

One last thing. Make no mistake, the only reason Republicans/conservatives have any power is through Gerrymandering of congressional districts and unequal vote representation in the electoral college. After all, more people are progressive than conservative in this country.
Click to expand...


Your per se argument doesn’t mean squat, get back to me when rank choice becomes law of the land, only the right is quilty of Gerrymandering, wasn’t aware of that.

Keep me posted on those processes to rebalance the electoral college.

For your uninformed information, the county is still center right, not left per Lexis Nexis, not some obscure web site or the comedy channel.

So what you are saying is there was no collision with the Russians, Trump kick Hilliary ass due to Gerrymandering.

Please inform the special council.
Click to expand...
Dude. Ranked choice voting has absolutely nothing to do with the electoral college! Trump lost the popular vote. Montana had 4 electoral votes in 1988 and now has 3. Facts hurt spsyk's brain. Need anything else? Or should I simply name all of the logical fallacies in your last post?

Also, please learn the difference between council and counsel. You're as dumb as Trump. Words matter.

I do like the word quilty though. I admit I'm guilty of that.
Click to expand...


Dump as the president of the United States, pretty good company.

Beat 16 top Republicans in the primaries, slaughter the top progressive in the shadow Democratic Party that they put forward in their fix primary.

Lost to her in the popular vote, by five million votes accountable primary by two states California and New York, still Got creamed by the electoral vote.

Get used to it, get some help to get your head straight, he’s around for another term, got the Supreme Count on the right track, the economy is in a run away, more jobs available than people to fill them, going to double +the GDP of his predecessor, chance to solve North Korea’s problems, talking to the Russians.

President Obama, may have been given the Nobel Peace Prize, why, nobody knows, and Trump is starting to prove that Obama may have been the worst president in history, and yet they might make room for Trump on Mt. Rushmore.

Thank’s to the deity for Gerrymandering.

What a doofus
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top