The Albuquerque Journal, the largest newspaper in New Mexico, here editorializes that a district state judge was correct when he ordered the city of Santa Fe to obey its own law, requiring the use of Ranked Choice Voting.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Ranked choice voting (RCV) and instant runoff voting (IRV) in single-winner districts (like in SF, Cali.) will permit only the biggest civic group to always win 100% of the time, insuring a one-party system, for as long as the single-winner system is in effect.
Are you interested in pure proportional representation?
The United Coalition has been using pure proportional representation for more than twenty-two consecutive years and it works fine.
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
ANY New Age editorial folks having ANY brain cells capable of noting that RCV ignores most of the votes in a Place Votes Table ???
ie produces rigged majorities just like top 2 primaries (which is a shorter version of RCV).
Is RCV better or worse than first-past-the-post?
It’s not perfect (no election system is), but RCV is better than FPTP, if for no other reason than it typically levels the playing for ballot access. Another excellent feature is that it demolishes the wasted vote syndrome.
Times are super-rough — think Germany 1932
49 L–M–R
1 M–L–R
49 R–M–L
Place Votes Table
—1—2—3—T
L 49–1–49–99
M 1–98–0–99
R 49–0–50–99
T 99—99—99
What about those 98 votes for M in 2nd place ???
L = Left wannabee tyrant-killer — Lenin/Stalin types
M – Moderate Middle law abiding
R – Right wannabee tyrant-killer — Hitler/Mussolini types
How many millions of humans DEAD in the 1900s due to actual tyrant killer regimes ???
How many possible BILLIONS of humans DEAD in the 2000s due to actual tyrant killer regimes
— esp due to rigged majority winners via top 2 primaries, RCV, NPV, etc. ???
—
PR and AppV – pending Condorcet math