FrostBlazer

Y’all Australians really have one of the best systems with your compulsory voting and not having FPTP. I feel the only thing that would make your system better is if it was upgraded to use ranked robin or STAR voting instead, as the least liked candidate can still win in uncommon circumstances under RCV.

From what I am seeing in a few states is that some establishment Dems push back against it or tore it down, but the progressive Dem groups showed open support of it. I was tracking RCV in Nevada and Arizona specifically and there was not a recommendation to shoot it down, but the main Democratic Party in those states didn’t tell their voters to vote one way or the other from what I saw, only the progressives groups advocated for it though.

I would believe Colorado Dems shot it down though, as they did the same in a few other states. I think it’s still possible to sway public opinion and pressure certain Dems to be in support of Alternative Voting though. I don’t think there is a consensus to shoot it down 100%, but they shoot it down in instances where they might feel it threatens some of their hand picked Senate seats. If they think it would gain the party as a whole more seats on the state level or even federally I believe they could be convinced to back Alternative Voting.

On a side note, Ranked Choice specifically is only slightly better than FPTP compared to say Ranked Robin, STAR, or Score voting. I believe we should push for one of these other three alternatives to prevent uncommon instances where the least liked candidate still can win.

Let’s make it happen through joining the Equal Vote Coalition, we can enable third parties to have a greater chance at winning this way.

Help start a ballot initiative in your state here.

If we want to make it more likely for a progressive to win the nomination, taking grassroots action now can make a big difference.

Are you looking to get involved to make a difference in the two party system? Get more progressives in office? Enable progressives to be the future face of the Democrat Party in your state? Then the biggest thing I can recommend would be joining an organization such as the Equal Vote Coalition. Their goal is to get better voting systems in place across the country, moving away from First Past the Post which has locked us into our two party system. Alaska and Maine have already succeeded in moving away from First Past the Post voting.

If we take action now, we can potentially get the voting system changed locally or on the state level for many of us before the midterm elections. Then as we continue to make progress, by the time 2028 rolls around we could safely pick our preferred candidates first and have safe backup candidate options so our preferred candidate(s) have a much greater chance at winning.

Help start a ballot initiative in your state here.

Maybe just the timing? No actual person would be actually mad about something like this. If it was done right after any random person’s death with the knowledge of the person’s death it could be seen as in slightly bad tastes. Knowing it was produced beforehand though makes it more wholesome but just unfortunately timed. I personally think it’s something the pope would have liked given that Luce exists as an official church anime character. I don’t know why the actual person removed it, but it could be they thought the timing was not so great.

What you described is a big issue. I feel it shows just how much there needs to be a push for change nationally and within each of the states to lobby the Democratic Party for change. Some states have open primaries, some have closed, and others have semi-open primaries. It makes no sense for states to not just be semi-open or fully open for primaries, as closed primaries just further alienates the party from potential voters.

As someone that voted Bernie in 2016, we didn’t have the votes in 2016 for Bernie to make it through the primary. The country itself was not as progressive in 2016 as it is now imo, especially so for the Democratic base.

For Bernie to have even had a chance to win the primary, the election format would have needed to not be First Past the Post. He was a victim of vote splitting found in First Past the Post and then establishment Dems allocated their voters votes to go towards Hillary. I don’t think it was fair what happened to Bernie especially with the DNC, but I realize now it was a flaw of the system itself that makes it extremely difficult for a progressive to win a Democratic presidential primary. I think it makes zero sense why people can’t pick their favorite candidate(s) first and then pick backup ‘safe’ candidates for elections. Also there is the issue of some states excluding people not registered with a party from voting in the primary. I feel it is a bad move to prevent these voters at the primary level since non-affiliated voters are usually the ones that ultimately decide the elections and they can give input ahead of time if they would vote for that candidate in the general election.

Having ranked robin voting, STAR voting, or score voting would help prevent a popular candidate like Bernie from losing by default to a ‘safe’ establishment pick.

Edit: Trust me, I would like to be wrong about 2016 and just how progressive country as a whole was at the time. But we’re really backwards in a lot of ways, especially so back then. The bulk of older voters were at most were economically voting for Democrats, not on social or economic policy by and large.

I did. You’re taking an uncharitable reading of my comment. Nowhere in my comment did I assign blame. My comment is about the need to change the voting system, which enables more progressive and third party wins ultimately. I also included some pragmatism, as I’ve seen progressives in my state struggle to win. I did not say anything about any sort “progressives are too left for the country and party!!!” because that’s not a very nuanced take and doesn’t reflect reality.

That’s not something I would say or agree with. My statement is separate from that type of perspective and not what my comment was talking about.

Bots and bad actors; bots and bad actors.

As you might have guessed I’m not a voter in those states but the point I was making about it remains pretty much the same.

In this specific case it will remain to be seen, but in general this type of election matters at tackling the problem of gerrymandering is the main point I was getting at, I believe it is important not to lose the forest for the trees on this.

Gerrymandering is one of the problems, turn out is another, disenfranchisement is another, ease of voting is an additional problem, clerical errors when voting is another problem as well. There are many specific problems and it is important that we try to address each of them.

Having politicians that people feel are looking out for their best interests matters as well. You can be the perfect candidate on paper, but maybe you’re not great at messaging to your local voting base or not using the right communication channels to reach your audience. Many of these things matter when trying to get people out to vote.

If more people that lived in deep red or blue states moved to a state from Wisconsin for instance and moved to a swing district, then it could substantially help shift the tides of the subsequent elections.

A person that votes blue moving to Wisconsin can be another blue Wisconsin vote. I’m not saying a random person moving and voting without preference, but someone that wants to make a difference moving.

I think state politics are a bit different from federal as well if we want to be more grand scale. States currently aren’t wanting to go into debt or ignore a debt limit to help their state grow economically or to provide wide safety nets. Mind you it is risky for a state to do that since it works a lot better on a federal level as you’re not directly competing against other states for lost business, assuming some corporations leave when you increase the corporate tax rate on a state level.

Functionally, moving to a purple state makes a notable difference. The reason the Michigan Supreme Court race recently mattered so much was because of the courts confirming potentially gerrymandered maps. If enough people move to purple states that they shifted blue, then it could impact Federal elections which could potentially impose legislation against gerrymandering at a federal level. They could even potentially withhold federal funding, in some instances, should states refuse to use non-gerrymandered maps.