Comments on: Ranked choice voting advocate: We may try again

By: Acadian

Acadian — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 05:14:46 +0000

Why, kevin? Most of us, by far, think otherwise.

By: kevin22262

kevin22262 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:36:03 +0000

Top Two ALSO needs to go.

By: smcelhiney

smcelhiney — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:01:27 +0000

The primary should be where the parties pick their own candidates by their own methods at their own expense. Then they should get to present them to us in the general election.

Save 1/2 a mil by scrapping RCV, what a lie. Get rid of the primary and save 1.5 mil. But it gives more control to the big parties and those with money to advertise. And it allows the tried and true technique of flinging mud rather than addressing issues to win election.

We’ll miss you RCV, rest in peace until this county gets a clue.

By: dltooley3

dltooley3 — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:27:31 +0000

Acadian’s got it right, top two is a big improvement over the older primary system – and the two stage election does give issues a better chance to focus and gel.

I’m wondering if an RCV **primary** might be just the ticket, the more the merrier in the primary and RCV would help to make sure folks can vote for who they think is best first and who they think will win second.

Such a process would make the final election simpler for all.

By: witchiwoman

witchiwoman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 08:15:59 +0000

I agree with jimkingjr. Even with ranked choice you end up with the top two. And it’s an unfair stacking of votes. I’m so glad it was repealed. I want our old open ballot back. It was the politicians who didn’t like that, not the voters. We loved the open ballot. The politicians did away with it without asking us. And then they acted like it was our idea….. NOT.

By: Acadian

Acadian — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:14:26 +0000

This result is just more evidence that voters are satisfied with Top Two. RCV was born of a need to replace the hated pick-a-party. Now that that execrable system is dead and gone, and RCV proved to be a bit of a mysterious labyrinth, voters are ready settle into the “new normal,” i.e., Top Two.

By: keepIRV

keepIRV — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:36:22 +0000

DragonQuest,

The top two got us Michael Hecht, does that mean we should repeal it? A voting system is no less valid if it does not produce the candidate you would have preferred to win.

By: jimkingjr

jimkingjr — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:06:36 +0000

Even in theory ranked choice doesn’t give third party candidates a beter chance. If you can’t muster more votes than the top two parties, you don’t get anywhere, no matter what the system.

If you don’t even run candidates- as most third parties fail to do- you also don’t get anywhere.

Maybe you ought to try it in Wahkiakum County…

By: moo

moo — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:47:20 +0000

Interesting it appears to both Shabro & ranked choice were voted out.

The reason i lean towards being in favor of ranked choice is because I despise the 2 party system & in theory ranked choice should give 3rd party candidates a better chance. Of course in non partisan races, that doesn’t really matter…………

By: DragonQuest

DragonQuest — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:27:58 +0000

People saw what ranked choice voting can do for Pierce County….They got Dale Washam. That explains why they repealed it.