Mark Schmitt has this essay on Vox, explaining why the United States would do better with more than two political parties.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Mark Schmitt has this essay on Vox, explaining why the United States would do better with more than two political parties.
“Several municipalities, including Minneapolis, have adopted ranked-choice voting for mayoral and council elections, with the additional benefit of lowering the barrier to entry for candidates who start without much money or establishment support.”
Minneapolis increased the filing fee for mayor and council elections after it adopted STV.
Armies of know it all MORONS who never have heard about Proportional Representation, Approval Voting and Condorcet (head to head) math.
Way too many MORONS who love having ALL POWERFUL Prezs —
See the ROT of the Roman Republic and its destruction by Augustus Caesar — with about 500 years of killer Emperors and then about 1000 years of DARK AGE tyrants/killers.
Is political history going in REVERSE to the STONE AGE ???
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
Demo Rep – I might actually be receptive to approval voting as an alternative to RCV/IRV. However, your mostly incomprehensible posts here every few days have made me think that maybe approval voting proponents are the morons. Your annoying posts and the fellow running for President in Colorado as a member of the Approval Voting Party are about all I can find who support it as a better alternative when compared with IRV/RCV.
Vote YES on Maine Question 5!
Lots of folks will be really annoyed if and when the Clinton or Trump MONSTER takes office and things really start to happen.
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V — pending Condorcet head to head math – with perhaps an App.V. tiebreaker.
Sorry no time for 100,000 word essays about Condorcet. Loot it up on the internet.
Hmm. Look it up on the internet.
Condorcet in the 1780s (repeat 1780s) noted that a choice in a 3 choice case could beat each of the other choices head to head.
Extreme example —
50 AMZ
49 ZMA
1 MAZ
1 MZA
101
51 M beats 50 A
52 M beats 49 Z
i.e. M is the COMPROMISE choice (with a mere 99 of 101 votes in 2nd place). A and Z may be super EXTREMISTS — think Clinton and Trump in 2016.
The New Age IRV math morons love to ignore most of the place votes table in head to head math.
“A and Z may be super EXTREMISTS — think Clinton and Trump in 2016.”
Clinton might be a crook and Trump might be a narcissistic sociopath, but neither is an extremist as it’s understood in this country’s contemporary political context.
Both Clinton and Trump put on a fake face in public.
Behind closed doors the MONSTERS are at work.
—-
The math problem with 3 or more choices — for a single office – is the divided majority problem —
26 AB
25 BA
49 Z
100
The obvious is to REQUIRE full rankings by each voter — to do the head to head math.
Possible tiebreakers needed — Approval voting or add place votes – 1st plus 2nd plus etc.
However- computerized ballots would be needed in any large election.
Um, they seem to be and are perceived as monsters in public….
But not extremists.
I’ve a issue concerning the article, where can i speak to the writer?
I returned from Facebook well done on a very good social media
promotion