Rank Choice Voting

posted Feb 24, 2009
THE TACOMIC - Rank Choice Voting (IRV, RCV, tacomic)
Sizes:   web  |  email  |  print

<< >>
2/5 - A third public judgment on ranked-choice voting, Tacoma News Tribune

2/4 - Pierce County Parties continue to undermine RCV, The Melon

2/3 - VOTING: Act now to get rid of ranked choice system, Tacoma News Tribune

1/28 - Ranked Choice Voting Public Meeting, Exit133

11/18/2008 - One way to make RCV work: partisanship,

11/13/2008 - If we lose, we�ll blame IRV, The Melon

11/13/2008 - RCV: How Many Did You Vote For?, Exit133

11/6/2008 - Let's talk about Ranked Choice Voting,

6/20/2008 - McCarthy's response to 2nd LD Dems, Spew

by Erik on 2/24/2009 @ 8:47am
Hard hitting Tacomic, pardon the pun.

I am glad you are not afraid to be redundant in your labels anymore, your readers need it for comprehension. No doubt there will be opportunities to post this Tacomic in discussions on RCV in the future,

The most lame attack on RCV is that it takes longer to count the votes.

by Mofo from the Hood on 2/24/2009 @ 9:00am
Why now?
Why not 200 years ago?
Why not 200 years from today?

by tacoma1 on 2/24/2009 @ 10:43am
I would rather spend a million dollars on almost anything........except RCV.

by fredo on 2/24/2009 @ 11:03am
RCV got off to a bad start. The voting materials didn't clearly state that you could just vote for your favorite candidate as you did in the past. You weren't required to participate in the ranking process. The voting instructions were inadequate at best incoherant at the worst.

by Erik Hanberg on 2/24/2009 @ 11:32am
If the Irish can elect their President using RCV, and if Australia can elect their Parliament using it, then clearly it's not a case of whether it's more or less difficult. It's just different than what we're used to.

I still maintain that it's a good idea, but I'd like to see it applied to only partisan races.

by NineInchNachos on 2/24/2009 @ 11:44am
After the nader/bush ill-fiasco, I'd say we can't afford NOT to spend money on RCV.

Why now? Why Not Now?
Why not 200 years ago? We didn't invent computers yet.
Why not 200 years from now? Why not not 200 years from now?

One thing is true: Democratic Party is as morally decayed and corrupt as the Republican Party (GOP).
RCV is the least corruptible, most fair system ever devised by SCIENCE.
Thus, it is a system the BI-REPUBLICAN/DEMOCRAT INCESTUOUS CONSPIRACY PARTIES will stop at nothing to destroy.

I call for free thinking people to rise up and rule this country, not the FRANKENSTEIN GANGSTERS depicted in this cartoon.

by fredo on 2/24/2009 @ 11:56am
Erik@ The issue raised by RCV isn't whether it works, the issue is do we get better results? Are the governments in Ireland and Australia working better with RCV?

by thriceallamerican on 2/24/2009 @ 12:05pm
Why not 200 years ago? We didn't invent computers yet.

Thing is, RCV isn't really so complicated that you couldn't count it by hand... (It would just take a while.)

by Erik Hanberg on 2/24/2009 @ 12:26pm
@fredo Generally, I'm all for empowering the voter. Allowing them to pick a third party candidate without throwing away their vote keeps parties on their toes but also prevents a candidate with just a plurality from taking power. A candidate who takes office without a majority of the voters supporting them is going to have a hard time governing.

by seejane on 2/24/2009 @ 1:39pm
I think if the PUBLIC pays for the election then the public gets to dictate how we vote.

I am surprised that the party's (Republicans & Democrats) get to have a say. When they start paying for elections, they can do it their way.

by NineInchNachos on 2/24/2009 @ 4:02pm
amen seejane

by NineInchNachos on 5/6/2009 @ 10:38am
"This is a clear example of the establishment looking for any excuse they can find to stop a movement toward actual voter choice."

by NineInchNachos on 6/11/2009 @ 11:42pm
"Two of the state's top political scientists and a doctoral candidate took a look at Pierce County's ranked choice voting experiment and found it to be a pretty fair system."

that's right you screw heads, taste the rainbow...

by Dmitri on 6/13/2009 @ 9:01am

Interesting research would be to see whether either of those countries has had a leader who got fewer votes than his opponent and was then appointed President. If not, then I'd say they got better results.

Ralph Nader claims, and I think he's right, that we have the least accessible voting system of any of the western democracies.

I know that we're putatively the Greatest Country in the World, but we could learn a thing or two about elections and health care.

RCV allows you to express your preference for a third party candidate without "wasting your vote." If it was done clumsily here, fix the process, rather than condemning the whole idea.

I think the fact that both major political parties hate RCV is a pretty good endorsement.

by ElectricElliot on 6/13/2009 @ 11:07am
Great article about RCV -