a lot of 3rd party voters would still not vote for democrats. They hate democrats more than republicans and are driven by a desire to punish democrats for not being perfect.

I think your typical Bernie Sanders Independent would opt in for ranked choice. I don't think they hate Democrats more than Republicans. It's the people too fucking lazy to do their civic duty and vote for the idea of Democracy.

But Green Party voters and others on the extreme left.

Like Jill Stein? Some are not who they appear to be.

and those votes came from the Left and Democrats because they were so sure that Hillary (who never made a general election campaign appearance here) would win, that freed them to vote for a 3rd party candidate.

The far right and the far left are closer to each other than either is to the middle.

Neither are going to help Democrats if they are given 100 choices to rank their votes. We need to take the middle of the electorate and view the far left as the opposition they are.

They exist.

I've been all around this world and I've never met a progressive/liberal who wanted to burn it all down for the fun of it.

and every person cheering him on.

A shitload of people think that the current HC structure is evil, but I am 72, and100% happy with the system that's in place. Maybe I am just lucky, but it works great for me.

(as their 3rd choice perhaps) - in my mind - in their own minds, will NEVER see clear to vote for the D because one or two things that D supports - or just accepts - is a deal-breaker.

I think a significant number could be convinced to use their second or third choice votes for the "less bad" of the two likely winners.

Keeping in mind that the way RCV works, all they have to do to actually get their PREFERRED candidate to win, is convince enough like-minded souls to vote that person first, or maybe even second. With our current system, it is impossible to gauge the true approval level of 3rd party candidates, because the more pragmatic voters won't even consider voting 3rd party and "wasting their vote".

I could care less about third party candidates. My concern is what will benefit the Democratic Party.

You WILL have benefited the Democratic Party.

But you know ...

I have voted straight D for the last 20 years at least.

But I DON'T GIVE A FUCK WHAT BENEFITS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

I care about WHAT BENEFITS AVERAGE AMERICANS.

And getting Democrats to ACTUALLY WIN ELECTIONS, is - for the next several moments, at least, what will benefit average Americans.

I believe RCV will help Democrats to ACTUALLY WIN ELECTIONS. That is why I support it and why I posted about it here.


(And to be abundantly clear, I give even LESS of a FUCK about what benefits any third party in America that I am presently aware of. The so-called Greens and so-called Libertarians can kiss my a**. So can "not a dime's worth of difference" Michael Moore, at least as long as he has not apologized for that bullshit.)

to vote D as a second choice, you improved the ultimate vote total for the Democrat.

Sorry if my "if" in my previous post was too hard to parse.

because they want to punish democrats for not being perfect.

so Democrats didn't lose anything.

I know enough 3rd party voters to be confident that some of them would rank the D politician ahead of the R, in almost all circumstances (and if they even ranked the R at all).

It is true that it would go the other way also. There are right-wing 3rd parties whose voters would, in some percentage, rank the R before the D.

Even if the electoral outcome were a wash, the benefit would be in the visibility of the appeal of positions differing from those of the major parties.

I don't think it would be a wash, though. Why? Because the right-wing types are also "fall in line" types and more pragmatic, apparently, than our disaffected lefties. So those right-wingers are already grudgingly supporting the R candidate when they know they have to ... while our wingers feel they have to announce their support for the Green or whatever candidate. .. or just stay home because their candidate can't possibly win anyway, so what's the point? But if they can cast a vote that's SEEN - their first choice for their chosen candidate - then at least they are THERE at the polls and it isn't so hard to cast that second choice vote, as long as they aren't among those special angels who couldn't possibly sully their pure souls by voting for someone so imperfect as a Democrat, even to stop fascism. Those "special angels" are a lost cause anyway, and if they are anything like some FB "friends" I lost in 2016 (by one of us blocking the other), they are so confused that they would vote Trump before Clinton or Harris anyway. That's pretty damned hopeless, but they are the minority of "Left" ( ? ) wing voters I have known.

going to need to see some actual real world data. Belief doesn’t outweigh facts.

Not allowing a RW crank win the plurality when the Independent throws it to the Republican Party that funded the Independent campaign to begin with. Vote your heart, but make your 2nd vote D.

Vote your heart, but make the D your second choice.

it isn't perfect but it does eliminate the spoiler problem.

I also believe - maybe I'm too optimistic - that if a truly ideological 3rd party candidate is on the ballot, like a strong environmentalist running for the Green Party, if that candidate gets a decent showing in the ranked votes, then even though they didn't win, a savvy winner would realize that those positions have strong support and that winner damned sure ought to pay attention and act accordingly.

The current plurality system for most elections, completely obscures the popularity (or lack thereof) of 3rd party issue positions.

While others only get one.
Everyone who’s first choice fails then gets another bite of the cake of the total votes.
Only if second choice votes are counted as half a vote, third choice as one third of a vote, fourth choice as a quarter and so on, would I be anywhere close to agreeing to ranked choice voting.

The vote outcome would reflect the majority of voters. Seems like a better clarification of what the majority wants.

If you happen to LOVE one of the major party candidates and that candidate wins, well good for you, you got your FAVORITE candidate. For those who prefer a slightly different set of policy positions but will grudgingly support the major party candidate, then when the votes are tallied their first vote is essentially thrown out. Only one vote is actually COUNTED for each voter.

But that discarded vote isn't completely vaporized - the first round rankings will be visible to the winner, and could send a message that there is strong support for positions different than those taken by the major parties. In the current system, that information can't be gathered at all from election data.

. . . so I remain unconvinced it is much of a solution to anything.

and stupid voters who vote for them.

Not being in NY, I don't feel responsible, but I'll admit I didn't really know how bad he was going to turn out.

I see RCV as an improvement on the current system - not a cure-all for voter stupidity, politician corruption, and disinformation hijinks. I'm afraid those require work on other fronts.

I don't usually like to "post and run" but I have just about had it with the current situation, after reading a bunch of posts here I just decided to throw this out into the mix.

I'll consider the thoughts posted here and reply as I can.

anymore national elections that are fair, free, and unrigged after Trump declares martial law.

I've voted for 50 years now and have just 1 rule: I vote for the Democratic candidate or the Liberal candidate in a non-partisan race even if I don''t like them or I'm not excited by them, they're always better than the alternative, the Republican. Plus they count towards Democratic or Liberal control of whichever body they are in.

As for the national elections ... we will see what comes. Tough times ahead on that front, for sure.

If there is an election, I expect many Americans will be shocked at how 90%+ of the electorate favors our country's new direction of misogynist white Christian nationalism.
"How could this possibly happen?" we'll wonder.
"How can so many Americans support Trump and his godawful positions as pushed by uncharismatic useless toadies?" we'll ask.
"How do so many Russians support Putin? How do so many Hungarians support Orban?"

And after another decade or so and a few more such elections, we'll stop asking such questions, because that's just how things are now.

We want more to vote not less and changing and complicating things just makes more of a mess.