this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2025
136 points (97.2% liked)

politics

26881 readers
1996 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nutcase2690@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

I'd personally rather approval or star voting, since ranked choice can create voter apathy through too many candidates (look up the voter response to portland oregons's last election for an example). Having to pick a unique rank for everyone is kind of arbitrary imo, but honestly anything is better than what we have

[–] fulcrummed@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Australia has ranked choice voting but to deal with the inevitable cavalcade of candidates, the process and parties are prepared and offer cheat sheets for their ideologically aligned supporters who are lazy, apathetic or conscientious but less than ideally informed. A candidate and/or their party (there are many, many minority parties) will hand out “How to vote” pamphlets which basically explains to supporters who wish to vote for them, how they recommend ranking the other parties (or candidates for Independents) in the race. In the AUS version of the House of Reps they do this per candidate (many fewer options).

For the senate race with many times more candidates, they have a split on the voting form with a line drawn between the top and bottom of the ballot. Above the line the parties are listed and below the line, each candidate from each party is listed. States all get 12 senators with half up for election each cycle. Ie in an election 6 senators per state are being chosen. There may be 10 or 12 or more columns to choose from but since only 6 senators are getting elected, in order to cast a vote one can number at least 6 parties in order of preference ABOVE the line, or BELOW the line, you may select at least 12 of the potentially dozens of candidates.

Basically it helps your average Joe Blow navigate the process if they have a general alignment with at least one of the parties, or often people find themselves ranking backwards based on the lesser of evils.

This link explains the senate ballot way better than I do. https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/your-questions-on-notice/questions/how-are-senate-below-the-line-votes-directed-what-if-none-of-a-voters-12-preferences-gets-a-quota