Ranked Choice Voting should be vigorously opposed. It is a slick unconstitutional attack aimed to destroy the Electoral College, in the name of establishing a “clear majority,” without actually referencing the EC in the attack. Even worse, it is the hypermanagement of the voting form to force you to vote for candidates that you oppose. Literally no one supports their worst choice. That is not a choice as understood by any rational person. It is a shell game with iterated removal of choices until only the choice of the Council on Foreign Relations remains.
Categories
5 replies on “Ranked “Choice” Voting”
It works quite well in Australia. Without it the left would rule the country forever. Minor conservative parties support the Australian Liberal party and it and the National party governs in Coalition. The left benefit less because the hard left parties rarely preference the Australian Labor party.
Ranked choice voting only works if None of the Above is a valid choice. Even then, it’s not very good.
I haven’t heard of ‘Ranked Choice’ voting. What is it and where would I see it?
I think its another name for the Australian system. You rank all the candidates. If there is no majority winner, then the second choice of the voters for the biggest loser are used. If still no majority winner, repeat.
We call it preferential voting in Australia. https://www.aec.gov.au/learn/preferential-voting.htm
Some of the things sold by the left as ranked choice are distorted versions of the process.
The Wikipedia page on it is a bit confusing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting
If the libertarian vote were big enough to adversely effect the Republican vote it may be a solution but in most places the Libertarian vote is too small. Worldwide there are just as many conservative advocates of it as leftist. It depends on the nature of the electorate.
It would have no effect on the US electoral collage.