Ranked Vote: Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by Meta777, Apr 20, 2018.

  1. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hi folks,

    I'm setting this thread up to act as a discussion area for the Ranked Vote series. Also posting the list of planned votes here so that its more convenient to access. Been told my posts are a bit long, so will try to keep this short and just link to the more in-depth stuff. (but no promises).

    Basically, for anyone unaware, I've set up a series of Ranked votes in order to go through the exercise of using alternative voting methods such as Instant Runoff and Ranked Pairs and seeing as a community how they measure up against Plurality Voting. Its sort of a spin-off thing from a couple of larger more broadly scoped discussion threads:
    What To Do To Reduce Partisan Dysfunction In Politics
    Solutions Oriented Approach to Restoring Meaningful Civil Discourse

    There's a lot of good discussion in there^ if you're interested. The focus of this thread though, is to specifically examine how everyone feels about Ranked voting in general as it compares to Plurality, particularly just after having participated in it. Since there are a number of Ranked Voting threads set up already, I think it'll be good to have this one as a central area to discuss the pros and cons of the process as experienced as well as a spot for any questions or suggestions relating to any of the different methods or how the votes were set up.

    Other alternative voting methods or set ups like Jungle primaries, approval voting, or others are fair game to discuss here as well, just please limit discussion to voting methods. :)
    (things like who can vote or how polling places are set up etc. are out of bounds for this thread)

    So...if you've voted in any of the Ranked polls, what did you think of the process? If you ended up submitting a ranked list of options, how would you rate the the idea of being able to rank options versus the Plurality method of simply being allowed to choose only one? And for those who only voted for one option, what are your feelings on others being allowed to rank?

    Assuming I've posted the results of a vote you participated in, what are you thoughts on them? Did your feelings on Ranked voting change after seeing the results? Do you think the results were fair? Why or why not? And if the results of the Ranked tallies happened to differ from the Plurality tally, what are your thoughts on that?

    Also if anyone has suggestions for additional topics to cover/set up a Ranked Vote for,
    please feel free to suggest them here.

    List of Past/Planned Votes:
    [04/16/18] What is the Best Flavor of Ice Cream (results posted)
    [04/16/18] What are your Favorite Vegetables (results posted)
    [04/13/18] What is the Best Smartphone (results posted)
    [04/20/18] What is the Best Pet to Own (results posted)
    [05/25/18] What are the Nation's Top Issues Most Needing to be Addressed (US) (results posted)
    [06/08/18] How To Reform Redistricting And End Political Gerrymandering (results posted)
    [06/01/18] What To Do About The Long-Term Implications of Automation (results posted)
    [06/16/18] What To Do To Reduce Partisan Dysfunction In Politics (results posted)
    [07/14/18] How To Enact Comprehensive Immigration Reform (results posted) (cat results) old> ([2][3][4][5][6][7])
    [08/03/18] What To Do To Stop Back-room Dealing In Politics (results posted)
    [08/17/18] How To Finally Resolve the Abortion Debate (results posted)
    [07/27/18] How To Restore Meaningful Civil Discourse (results posted)
    [No Date Set] How To Fix Our Campaign Finance Laws
    [No Date Set] Gun Violence v Gun Rights
    [No Date Set] Health Care Costs
    [No Date Set] Debt and Deficits
    [No Date Set] Global Warming
    [No Date Set] Education
    [No Date Set] Secrete Surprise???
    [No Date Set] 2016 Presidential Vote
    [07/12/18] What are your Favorite Colors (voting underway)
    [07/12/18] What are the Creepiest Bugs (results posted)
    [10/26/18] How Should We Respond to Foreign Attempts at Sowing Discord and Violence (voting underway)
    [10/26/18] How Can We Prevent Societal Rifts From Expanding into Violence (voting underway)
    [06/28/19] Who Won the First Democratic 2020 Primary Debates (results posted)

    -Meta
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2019
  2. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    28,306
    Likes Received:
    11,171
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ranked voting goes against the foundation of what the creators of the Constitution stood for, majority rule.

    Australia's parliament is often elected with as little as 30 something percentage of the vote, does that sound like majority rule to you?

    Another problem is that people often don't rank all the candidates so if their chosen ones are eliminated that leaves them with no vote in the election. This happens quite frequently, votes not being counted even though the person actually voted.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  3. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    16,153
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why do we have to vote on the best flavor of ice cream? Can't each of us just eat the ice cream we like?

    Some decisions should not be made by government but should be left to individuals.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2018
  4. GoogleMurrayBookchin

    GoogleMurrayBookchin Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2017
    Messages:
    6,654
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Anyone who opposes Ranked Vote is a lizard wearing human skin. It's an obvious solution to an obvious problem.
     
  5. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What a strange thing to say. You're suggesting that Plurality voting exemplifies majority rule more so than Ranked systems?
    How can that be the case when Plurality often leads to a lessor preferred candidate beating
    out a candidate that the majority of voters may actually like more?
    Plurality != Majority

    The thing I think you may not be taking into account is the spoiler effect. In 3+ person races, you can have 2 similar candidates which are preferred over say a third candidate by something like 60-40%, but if votes are split in a Plurality election between the two more liked candidates then that third lesser liked candidate can still win despite their not having the support of the majority.
    Note that this isn't an issue that Ranked systems deal with as much or at all in the case of Condorcet methods.

    The ideal here is that, however many candidates are running,
    the winner ought to be the one who beats out everyone else if a one on one contest were to be held.
    Or at least some close approximation to that. I've said it before, and I'll say it again,
    FPTP Plurality voting is basically the worst system we could have!

    In the U.S. system its possible to win an election with a mere 23% of the vote.
    But I'm not so much concerned with the percentage, if there is high consensus there will be (or should be) a large percentage regardless,
    and likewise, if there are an extremely wide variety of disparate views the percentage will be less, what I'm more concerned with is minimizing the number of voters who's votes don't affect the ultimate outcome. In any given Plurality election, you can count on around at least 50% or so of the electorate's votes becoming effectively nullified by the result. That's never going to go to zero, but we can do better.

    And that would be their choice. There ain't no requirement in a Ranked system that says everyone needs to rank every candidate in order for it to work. I'm just saying we ought to give them the option to do so if they want to. Besides, you're saying that if their top option gets eliminated that they then effectively lose their vote? Are you aware that that is exactly what happens in every Plurality election?? Again, 50% average nullification. Except that in Plurality election, such a state is forced on the voter rather than it being a choice that they made themselves.

    BTW, you may be interested in the results I posted for the three Ranked Votes that have occurred on this site.
    I think they may illuminate things a bit better. Definitely check out the vegetable one, as it includes a detailed walk-through of how the IRO process works.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?goto/post&id=1068992181
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?goto/post&id=1068992188
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?goto/post&id=1068992191

    -Meta
     
    redeemer216 likes this.
  6. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure, you can bring your own ice cream if you want. Just don't ask me to pay for it.
    Not that I'm paying for any of the others either though. Lol.
    The purpose of these votes is just to illustrate how Ranked systems work in comparison to Plurality

    Perhaps, but for those decisions that shouldn't be left to individuals, wouldn't you agree that, assuming there are more than just two options, a Ranked method would be preferable to FPTP Plurality?

    -Meta
     
  7. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,328
    Likes Received:
    4,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't see any problem with Ranked Voting but the current system of how people actually get on the ballot is going to have to change before Ranked Voting can be a real alternative to the current system. And even then you have to somehow modify how the states allocate electoral votes since Ranked Voting doesn't seem compatable with a winner take all system.

    In fact it wouls seem to me that in order for Ranked Voting to be workable and valid America is going to have to eliminate the electoral college. And even then would still lie to see a " none of the above" choice on the ballot.
     
  8. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually, the Electoral College only applies to presidential elections.
    For every other vote, e.g. congressional, state races, party primaries, referendums, etc. etc. it would not be an issue at all.
    And for the presidential races, yeah, getting rid of the EC is one idea, but it is only one of several,
    as its also possible to instead incorporate a ranked system into the EC without getting rid of it.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?goto/post&id=1068933378

    -Meta
     
  9. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2018
  10. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    26,328
    Likes Received:
    4,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    first I would think you have to get rid of winner take all states!
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2018
  11. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not exactly. Option 2 and to some extent option 1 and 4 are essentially based off of a winner take all approach.
    And options 3, 4, and 5 could basically go either way and things would still be able to function.
    So long story short, no, it is not necessary to get rid of the winner take all aspects of state elector designations in order for things to work.

    -Meta
     
  12. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
  13. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    28,306
    Likes Received:
    11,171
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why don't you share with us how ranked voting gives a nation a better government.

    Australia has had some extreme problems in their government even with ranked voting so in the end ranked voting doesn't change anything actionable other than the way you get candidates into office.

    It doesn't improve the quality of them in any way so one has to wonder....."Why bother changing how they are elected"?
     
  14. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because the point of ranked voting is not strictly to result in a better government, rather, like democracy in general,
    the main point of ranked voting is to give the citizens a choice, or more of a choice, as to how government is set up and operates.
    That putting more power into the hands of the citizens as such is often the best way to achieve a better government is merely a happy byproduct...icing on the cake as it were...and in cases where citizens take a system like that and proceed to choose a 'bad government' anyways, which is certainly possible, at least they could look back and say that it was 100% their choice to do so. Let it be known that nobody every said that having the freedom to choose was easy.

    Anyways,...though be they not absolutes, here are 5 tendencies of ranked voting which I personally find beneficial.
    1. It forces voters to think more about the choices they're making.
    2. It leads to more moderate results and less extremism, less partisanship, and less dysfunctional gridlock.
    3. It does not artificially limit the choices that voters can make. Allowing them to more fully voice their preferences.
    4. It fosters compromise rather than hate for dissenting views and disincentivizes complacency among those in office.
    5. It encourage candidates more to play up their own strengths rather than constantly trying to slime their opposition.
    Surely you would agree that these are all good things, right?
    And now, having shared just 5 benefits of having a ranked system, here are 5 more points against holding on to Plurality:
    5 Biggest Reasons Plurality Voting Fails

    I don't agree with that.

    Again, changing the way we get candidates into office is the whole point. Doesn't necessarily mean the outcome will be significantly different in every circumstance, just look at the pofo demostration votes, in 2.5 out of the 4 votes that have been held so far, the winning result was the same regardless of the method that was used to determine it. Though granted, those votes were far from polarizing, and we'd likely see a lot more variance when voting on something that was a bit more political.

    But the takeaway here is to understand that giving voters more choice doesn't necessarily mean there will be a drastic and immediate change in outcome, the idea though is, whatever the outcome, we should want the process to be as fair as possible, and that in making things fair and giving voters that choice we would invoke gradual improvement over time.

    As for governmental problems persisting even when a ranked system is in place. Same thing. And please consider democracies in general have maintained and experienced serious governmental problem after casting off things like monarchies and dictatorships. But surley you wouldn't try to argue that the fact that problems persist in a democracy means that moving towards it and away from monarchy and dictatorship was a waste of time....would you?....

    See above.

    -Meta
     
    LiveUninhibited likes this.
  15. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,153
    Trophy Points:
    113
    but you have a president who was elected by a minority, Clinton won by 2 million votes so how is that democratic???
     
  16. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,153
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the over looked democratic option is Proportional Representation, it encourages mutli-party politics, everyone's voice is represented, no group is shut out of having a voice unless they fail to meet a minimum threshold of votes...and what I think is the best part, it's very difficult for one party to attain a majority on it's own, it requires compromise with other parties to find a consensus of moderates and a majority...and the extremist parties on the both ends of the political spectrum are shut out..
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2018
  17. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    28,306
    Likes Received:
    11,171
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The popular vote has nothing to do with winning a presidential campaign.

    That's like saying a football team should have won a game because they had more yards then the other guys even though their score was lower.

    That's not how it works.
     
  18. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,153
    Trophy Points:
    113
    eeew that's hypocritical, you go and criticize Australia -"Australia's parliament is often elected with as little as 30 something percentage of the vote, does that sound like majority rule to you?" which the winner gets the seat through plurality of votes in which candidate with the most vote wins or TPTP system ...

    and then defend a voting system that gives the Presidency to the candidate that finishes with a minority/losing number of votes...that's some messed up democracy you got, you have a president that did not win a plurality of votes
     
  19. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    16,153
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you're talking about Trump, he didn't receive a minority of votes. He received 304, while Clinton only received 227.
     
  20. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,153
    Trophy Points:
    113
    a effed up method you'd expect in a third world **** hole, even those countries understand how messed up that is and reject it...2nd choice wins, embarrassing.
     
  21. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    16,153
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He wasn't 2nd choice. He was clearly the first choice: 304 vs 227.
     
  22. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,153
    Trophy Points:
    113
    lol, sounds like something you'd find in banana republic democracy...but even in banana republics there would be rioting in the streets if they got that kind of undemocratic result...
     
  23. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    16,153
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Have you read the constitution? The states choose electors, and the electors choose the president. You understand that this method was done for a specific reason, right?
     
  24. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
  25. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    11,916
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113

Share This Page