Stopped making sense
I still can't get over the insanity of how Portland is going to pick the new City Council a year from now. The city auditor explains it this way in the newly released "candidate guide":
Single Transferable Vote (applies to City Councilor contests)
• The end result is 3 winners.
• Any candidate receiving more than 25% of the vote in a given round is declared a winner.
• If any candidate has received more votes than required to win, the surplus of votes for that candidate (i.e., the amount of votes a candidate receives above the threshold of votes to win) is transferred proportionally to each ballot's next highest-ranked choice. If no winner is determined in a round of counting, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, their votes are moved to each ballot's next highest-ranked choice, and a new round of counting begins.
It's stunning, really. What a zoo. Thanks, kids!
That would be "candidate kids" to you.
ReplyDeleteThey should just keep experimenting with it. Let the voters who think this whole system is bunk register to have negative votes that cancel out the positive votes of other candidates. Rational voters would sacrifice the right to vote for their candidate in exchange for voting against another. Honestly, most of the time i vote, I'm choosing the lesser of two evils.
ReplyDeleteAnd if any candidate gets a negative vote total, they are barred from running again for 10 years.
DeleteMy eight grade civics class had more intelligent conversations than the discussions around this debacle. Of course that a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteGeez, can't wait to see the results. Should be interesting.
ReplyDeleteI have seen nothing from Portland or MultCo elections saying that they have the machines and software in place to tabulate ranked-choice voting. Also, I've seen nothing on how they'll handle the ballots from WashCo and ClackCo voters (and, yes, some Portland residents live in WashCo and ClackCo).
ReplyDeleteThose election machines can do all sorts of fancy calculations. But nobody is allowed to see the inner workings because they are all proprietary and owned by the same shell company that is in turn owned by a big shot that you are not allowed to name here.
DeleteIt might be amusing watching the various progressive factions accuse each other of "rigging" the outcome in this new-fangled election system. I'll make popcorn.and take it in from a safe vantage point in Clackistan.
DeleteWhat if they held an election and nobody played along?
ReplyDeleteAsk the stupid F****** voters
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree. Some of that ignorance———actually more than some of that ignorance, comes at the hands of the current media’s regurgitating press releases rather than asking relevant questions.
Delete