this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
169 points (94.2% liked)

politics

19091 readers
3480 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/21917446

Ballot in question:

Mayor:

District 1:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I mean I dont think thats so bad. But I bet that makes the average Americans eyes explode.

[–] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

My neighbor state of Idaho is actively trying to stop it by saying it's "confusing".

[–] Cyyris@infosec.pub 9 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Alaskan here - we've had RCV since 2020, and this year there was a ballot measure to remove it... Can't have shit in this country 😒. Being too "confusing" has been the only argument against it I've heard (AKA, no actual substantial argument against it.) Oh, and I guess that we elected a Democrat for House Rep because of it. Definitely can't have that.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago

When it comes right down to it, that’s the difference between the Republican platform and the Democratic platform — Democrats say “here’s a bunch of options, please inform yourself and rank these according to what you think is best, and we’ll do what the majority wants” and Republicans say “all these rules and regulations are too confusing for you. Vote for us and we’ll get rid of the confusing stuff and make all the decisions in black and white terms so you can get back to living your life.”

That’s the real reason why Republicans did so well this time around.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I can give you a bunch of arguments against it. You can just go look at my history if you want a bunch of sources. Not really possible to boil it down to a short and sweet answer sadly, but in general there are much better voting methods and ones that vastly fewer problems. RCV was invented before we had a lot of data on elections and how people vote and we’ve learned a lot since then. RCV is almost always a bad choice if you’re trying to implement a new system. Either go with approval for simplicity, or STAR or 3-2-1 if you want a very good election system with all of the benefits of RCV and none of the drawbacks.

[–] Cyyris@infosec.pub 2 points 3 days ago

Oh absolutely, I did not mean to imply RCV is the end-all-be-all. STAR is my preferred voting system, but if it's RCV vs pure plurality , I'd much rather have RCV.

[–] gdog05@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

These extremist patriots can't be bothered to fill out a couple of circles in the name of democracy. It doesn't feel cool.

Lol people see this be like "AAAAHHHH FUCK I TOOK ENOUGH TESTS IN SCHOOL I DONT WANNA SEE THIS AGAIN" and yeet it into a fire.