you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 25 points 8 months ago (7 children)

Why did California pick such a clearly terrible way of running primaries? It could have worked with ranked-choice voting but, the way it is now, you get hilarious features like the Republican frontrunner being incentivized to have people vote for the other Republican rather than for him (because if he's #1 and a Democrat is #2, he definitely loses the general election, but if he's #1 and the other Republican is #2, he has about 50% odds of winning).

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    It's a poison pill to force strategic voting and push people towards candidates that are backed by money. Colorado turned down ranked choice voting, and a lot of it was due to a similar single-vote primary system being packaged with it to make it not work well for actually electing candidates the people want. Voting reform activists knew this and made sure enough people knew that ranked choice elections was a trojan horse for a bad single vote primary system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    Ranked choice voting has become my top policy issue

    Long-term it's the most important change we could make. It's what can get us candidates people actually like, rather than constantly voting for the "electable" one with corporate backers

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    Why did California pick such a clearly terrible way of running primaries?

    I don't know the answer, but I'll bet it will turn out to be another dumb Democrat idea, to make things "Fair," which ALWAYS means giving some unfair advantage to MAGAs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I’m thankful for their fucked uo voting system because it got me candidate Gary Coleman and governor Schwarzenegger

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments