• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I think ranked choice voting would give us RFK as president

    Edit: that was assuming we had these same candidates only as ranked choice obviously we would have more candidates

    • Patapon Enjoyer
      link
      fedilink
      16 months ago

      You gotta consider how many viable candidates aren’t throwing the hat in the ring because there is no chance for them to get even close thanks to the current system, plus they’d be labeled as spoilers.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      16 months ago

      Honestly my knowledge of ranked choice voting is that it works better for reps other than the president, and that our basically one guy wins it all form for presidential elections feels like ranked choice would work less. I’m willing to be wrong. I’m not sure if I actually like systems where the majority party picks the head of state, but it does feel like ra ked choice voting makes it matter more there.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        16 months ago

        Yeah. Nobody wants to acknowledge it because they watched a youtube and define themselves by “ranked choice” (and most don’t even know the specifics of the criteria they are supporting…)

        Ranked Choice makes a LOT of sense at the county and state level. Because that is where third party candidates already have good odds if they actually represent the will of the people.

        At the presidential? And with electoral college nonsense? The amount of money required to run a campaign and the tendency for certain chuddy demographics to rally behind one shitstain mean that you only really have two viable parties and ranked choice, at best, is a noop. At worst it enables spoilers.

        Which… is also why a lot of parliament based governments still tend to have two major parties. They just have more splitting but… we already do when you realize that AOC and Hakeem Jeffries are in the same party.