Maine Becomes First State To Try Ranked-Choice Voting for President

[OKTexas]

The inability to understand something so simple is a perfect reflection of why our political system is so fucked in the first place.

Ranked choice voting is a far superiors system to what we have now. It would be amazing to see it spread to every state.

It's a system for the simple minded that can't stay with a candidate and their enablers.

.

On the contrary - the current system is for the weak minded that cant get beyond 'my team' and continually is forced to vote for people they do not support out of fear that the worse candidate might win.

Interesting that the same people complaining that ranked choice voting is somehow a bad thing are the people demanding that those voting for libertarians are putting democrats into office because it costs the republican those votes.

Which is it?

There have always been third party candidates that get wasted votes, that's the system we have, it can work against both major parties. You're the one advocating changing those wasted votes to a different candidate.

.

 

[easyt65]

I didn't ask for a link. Since you are such an expert I asked YOU to explain why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

I'm not going to educate your lazy, ignorant ass.

Bwuhahahahaha.....how embarrassing for you that was....

In other words you can't explain this election fraud scam, why it would be necessary to rank LOSERS when the only relevant selection is your 1 and only vote for the person you want to be President - '1 person, 1 vote'.


Thank for clarifying / confirming that. 'Nuff said.

 

[dblack]

I didn't ask for a link. Since you are such an expert I asked YOU to explain why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

I'm not going to educate your lazy, ignorant ass.

In other words you can't explain this election fraud scam, why it would be necessary to rank LOSERS when the only relevant selection is your 1 and only ote for the person you want to be President - '1 person, 1 vote'.


Thank for clarifying / confirming that. 'Nuff said.

Sure, that's it. Lock that mind up solid!

 

[easyt65]

I didn't ask for a link. Since you are such an expert I asked YOU to explain why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

I'm not going to educate your lazy, ignorant ass.

In other words you can't explain this election fraud scam, why it would be necessary to rank LOSERS when the only relevant selection is your 1 and only ote for the person you want to be President - '1 person, 1 vote'.


Thank for clarifying / confirming that. 'Nuff said.

Sure, that's it. Lock that mind up solid!

You have proven you have no clue what YOU are talking about,, can not explain it, can not defend it. Well done, sheep.

Bwuhahahaha......

'1 person, 1 vote' is a very easy Constitutional concept to understand, is easy to explain, and prevents you from looking stupid....like this ranking voter fraud scam.

 

[dblack]

I didn't ask for a link. Since you are such an expert I asked YOU to explain why anyone should waste time ranking losers when the only thing that matters is your 1 and only choice / selection for President...

I'm not going to educate your lazy, ignorant ass.

In other words you can't explain this election fraud scam, why it would be necessary to rank LOSERS when the only relevant selection is your 1 and only ote for the person you want to be President - '1 person, 1 vote'.


Thank for clarifying / confirming that. 'Nuff said.

Sure, that's it. Lock that mind up solid!

You have proven you have no clue what YOU are talking about,, can not explain it, can not defend it. Well done, sheep.

Bwuhahahaha......

'1 person, 1 vote' is a very easy Constitutional concept to understand, is easy to explain, and prevents you from looking stupid....like this ranking voter fraud scam.

This is like the consistent motif of Trumpster idiots. Just keep repeating the same false shit over and over again until you believe it's true. You're sinking our country with this insanity.

 

[easyt65]

This is like the consistent motif of Trumpster idiots. Just keep repeating the same false shit over and over again until you believe it's true. You're sinking our country with this insanity.

You know what your doing is obvious, tight?! You keep flapping your gums, dancing around the questions, refusing to answer, and attempting to call the person who just called you out - exposing YOUR ignorance, 'ignorant'.

Bwuhahahaha.........

Again, the Constitutional Principle of '1 person, 1 vote to cast' is one of the simplest concepts to grasp - the Founding Fathers made it 'Idiot Proof' ... except never in their wildest imaginations did they see snowflakes THIS stupid existing nearly 2 centuries later.

Only Democrats and snowflakes intent on rigging / stealing elections would feel the need to complicate that simple process.

Bwuhahahaha

 

[busybee01]

What ever happened to the good ol' American tradition of '1 person - 1 vote'?

That follows the tradition of one man one vote. You are clueless.

 

[dblack]

What ever happened to the good ol' American tradition of '1 person - 1 vote'?

That follows the tradition of one man one vote. You are clueless.

But they're doggedly persistent in their cluelessness. There's a kind of brainwashing at work here.

 

[busybee01]

Voting for Libertarian, Green, or independent candidates will not mean “throwing your vote away.”



On Monday, the state's Supreme Judicial Court upheld the use of ranked-choice voting for its presidential and congressional races, resisting efforts by the state's Republican Party to force a stop to its use.

In ranked-choice voting, citizens aren't asked to just choose a single candidate. They are permitted to rank the candidates from most to least favorite. In order to win a ranked-choice vote, a candidate is required to earn a majority of the votes (more than 50 percent), not just a plurality. In the event no candidate gets a majority of the votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is tossed out of the running. Then the votes are tallied again, but for voters whose favorite was just tossed out, their second choice now counts as their vote. This continues until one candidate has earned at least 50 percent of the votes.

Maine Becomes First State To Try Ranked-Choice Voting for President

Voting for Libertarian, Green, or independent candidates will not mean “throwing your vote away.”

reason.com

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

.

Why don't you try finding out what it is first. It follows the principle of one man one vote.

 

[busybee01]

This is like the consistent motif of Trumpster idiots. Just keep repeating the same false shit over and over again until you believe it's true. You're sinking our country with this insanity.

You know what your doing is obvious, tight?! You keep flapping your gums, dancing around the questions, refusing to answer, and attempting to call the person who just called you out - exposing YOUR ignorance, 'ignorant'.

Bwuhahahaha.........

Again, the Constitutional Principle of '1 person, 1 vote to cast' is one of the simplest concepts to grasp - the Founding Fathers made it 'Idiot Proof' ... except never in their wildest imaginations did they see snowflakes THIS stupid existing nearly 2 centuries later.

Only Democrats and snowflakes intent on rigging / stealing elections would feel the need to complicate that simple process.

Bwuhahahaha

I see you got your talking points. Why don't you try educating yourself. 1 person 1 vote is still intact. You are the one who is stupid.

 

[busybee01]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

.

No it does not. It ensures every voter has a say. It also prevents voters to be disenfranchised.

 

[Desperado]

What the election rigging fuck??

No rigging.
It's a standard voting method around The World.

Single transferable vote - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No matter what the song says, we are NOT the world.
AMERICA FIRST

 

[OKTexas]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

.

No it does not. It ensures every voter has a say. It also prevents voters to be disenfranchised.

If you vote, even if it's for a loser, you're not disenfranchised and have had your say. But hey, feel free to keep trying to put lipstick on that pig. LMAO

.

 

[dblack]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

.

No it does not. It ensures every voter has a say. It also prevents voters to be disenfranchised.

If you vote, even if it's for a loser, you're not disenfranchised and have had your say. But hey, feel free to keep trying to put lipstick on that pig. LMAO

.

The problem is that you don't understand how ranked-choice voting works, and clearly don't want to. You're jerking off.

 

[XponentialChaos]

This isn't even a partisan issue.

The people here who have an issue with ranked-choice voting are the least informed about how it works. It's pretty obvious.

The biggest benefit here is that it directly opposes the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils. How many voters didn't like the candidate they voted for in 2016 but voted for them anyway because they hated the other candidate more? We know how the game works. Either vote for one of the two top candidates or your vote is wasted. Ranked-choice voting gives people an actual voice without coercing them into the two-party system.

I brought up this topic a while back here: CDZ - Ranked Voting

 

[dblack]

This isn't even a partisan issue.

The people here who have an issue with ranked-choice voting are the least informed about how it works. It's pretty obvious.

Yeah. Some people just want to turn everything into a partisan issue. They can't really see anything outside that bubble.

 

[OKTexas]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

.

No it does not. It ensures every voter has a say. It also prevents voters to be disenfranchised.

If you vote, even if it's for a loser, you're not disenfranchised and have had your say. But hey, feel free to keep trying to put lipstick on that pig. LMAO

.

The problem is that you don't understand how ranked-choice voting works, and clearly don't want to. You're jerking off.

Actually I do, I just think it's un-American. Of course it's a scheme you commies would come up with.

.

 

[dblack]

Only thing they're throwing out is the principle of one person one vote. I seriously doubt it would withstand a federal court challenge.

That's simply a lie, promulgated by Ds and Rs who worry ranked-choice voting will undermine two-party dominance. Ranked-choice voting is still one person, one vote.

Oh bullshit, it's an unfettered mulligan system, multiple chances to pick a winner. Try ranked choice betting at your local horse track and watch the guy at the counter laugh when you try to pick 3 different winners with the same 2 dollar bet.

.

No it does not. It ensures every voter has a say. It also prevents voters to be disenfranchised.

If you vote, even if it's for a loser, you're not disenfranchised and have had your say. But hey, feel free to keep trying to put lipstick on that pig. LMAO

.

The problem is that you don't understand how ranked-choice voting works, and clearly don't want to. You're jerking off.

Actually I do, I just think it's un-American. Of course it's a scheme you commies would come up with.

.

yes, commies. got it.

 

[dblack]

The problem is that you don't understand how ranked-choice voting works, and clearly don't want to. You're jerking off.

Actually I do, I just think it's un-American.

You clearly don't. Your comments have made the obvious.

 

[FA_Q2]

The problem is that you don't understand how ranked-choice voting works, and clearly don't want to. You're jerking off.

Actually I do, I just think it's un-American.

You clearly don't. Your comments have made the obvious.

I bet they do but the sheep are unable to accept anything whatsoever that may weaken - even if it does so by an imperceptible amount - the power of their chosen party.

Party says its bad ergo it must be so....