249
Oregon election results: Measure 117 adopting ranked-choice voting fails
(www.statesmanjournal.com)
Who votes against this? Really!
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
249 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19196 readers
2219 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
People who want their party to stay in power
They still could?
yeah they could but now they will.
We can't even get illusion of choice.
with other voting systems, third parties could gain more power (as intended), which means that the current duopoly would lose power, and they don't want that
They must also only order big macs and never change it up. It would be nice to see who people really want.
People who read the heavily biased voter's pamphlet and didn't use critical thinking
What does it say?
Many pages of testimonials (fearmongering) about it being a bad idea. I only skimmed it.
Well they voted so now they never will have to use it I guess.
I don't know anything about the campaign in Oregon, but most people are scared of things they aren't familiar with.
Also I'm guessing neither party really supported this much, since they benefit from first-past-the-post.
Wonder what the campaign against it was. This seems like a easy win. It's not even a religious thing like pro-choice.
Probably just a bunch of bullshit falsehoods, look at the campaign against issue 1 in Ohio. It was a change to the state constitution to put a citizen run commission in place to draw maps for voting districts and Republicans ran a campaign that was just straight up lying about what the issue was about. Then even threw misleading ballot language on the ballot, I doubt anyone read the ballot language though because it was a small novel.
Issue 1 took up the entire back page of my ballot yesterday and was just nonsensical legalese. People voted on it based on how there prefered candidates told them to, and we all saw who their preferred candidates were last night.
I wonder how many people showed up not seeing their ballot in advance.
The vast majority.
Damn education system failed.
Like you can see the test questions in advance and it's encouraged.
Politics (especially among republicans) has become a bit religious, so it's not really THAT different I guess
Based on the popular vote they traded Jesus for this monster who can't open a door.
Missouri voted to ban it 😭
you would think even If you hated Harris you would at least vote for more dinner options.
I'm revising my estimation of the electorate a lot tonight
Every time I think the rubes couldn't possibly be stupider we have an election and I'm proved wrong
I never heard that word I think (not a native speaker) and DDG only brings up some band, which I don’t think you mean here. What are the rubes?
Colloquialism for someone who's easily fooled or taken advantage of
Thank you!
We had a referendum on ranked choice voting (referred to as AV at the time) here in the UK some years ago. The campaign against it was shocking. Well funded and extremely vocal. Bizarre lies and misinformation.
Someome really hates changing FPTP.
The status quo perhaps?
The funny thing is we just had a really unusual election where the right splintered and FPTP handed a landslide to the centre-left party.
The right is probably going to flip and campaign against FPTP soon.
Reducing extremism, reduces the impact of advertising, which means business loses influence... and the rich lose influence. So that is who hates ranked choice voting.