this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
172 points (99.4% liked)

News

23296 readers
928 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 77 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

First Ranked Choice vote.

Elect Progressive.

Other politicians: 'Okay that's enough RCV for America'

[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 22 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

Well Oregon also voted down RCV statewide because it's just too confusing lol

[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Our legislature passed RCV here in CA and our Dem governor vetoed it. Can't be electing progressives over more big money neoliberal Dems, gotta keep that voting power bloc intact

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This type of shit is exactly why Trump got reelected. The party is run by a bunch of charlatans.

[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They're good at representing their constituents all right. Sadly their only constituents are people donating to their campaigns.

Did Newsom take a rightward lean once he started getting groomed for a president run or has he always been this bad? I feel like every time I hear about him nationally hes doing something scummy like that or rounding up homeless people.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 23 points 4 days ago

The UK did this about a decade ago by a 2-to-1 margin, on the same grounds. Commentators in Australia (which have had ranked choice voting for generations) quipped that this was final proof that Australians are smarter than Brits.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Was it too confusing or did someone spend a lot of money playing ads that kept saying it was too confusing I wonder. I'd actually love to hear what the local ads and media around that ballot measure were like if anyone is local to Oregon.

[–] HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It wasn't so much confusing as it was over saturated, like not even half the candidates had statements in the voter pamphlet and many didnt respond to questionnaires or anything. City council was even worse, my district had the entire back of the page filled with candidates like 20+ names

I'm all for choice, I'd rather have it than not, but I can certainly see how it turned people off of the idea, perhaps intentionally.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago

I used to be more lenient, but it's 2024 and people running for elected political offices with ZERO online presence just pisses me off. I know this is gonna blow everyone's mind, but a large percentage of voters wait till the day before election to research any candidates, sometimes for less than an hour before giving up. It's probably why most of them don't fill out information so a voter just chooses them and they're less likely to dissuade someone if they don't say anything, at least it might've worked in the past.

It needs to be a required special-credit for highschool graduation to fully research and demonstrate you know the candidates on the ballet for your local election and register to vote. This could be bi-partisan, get everyone involved. It doesn't take fully re-working a shafted education system to get more engaged voters.

I'm just kinda miffed by the whole situation with Oregon, first the drug re-criminalization and now a RCV vote just got squashed. Can't wait to hear about everything that went down like with Alaska and Maine.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

not even half the candidates had statements in the voter pamphlet and many didnt respond to questionnaires or anything.

That has been annoyingly common in elections all over the place for as long as I can remember.

You went to the effort of getting on the ballot, but you can't be bothered to answer any questions or even tell people why they should vote for you?

[–] chowdertailz@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Am Oregonian, I didn't see any ads about RCV. Plenty of ads about other measures and local candidates. Presidential race didn't bother spending money on us as Portland, Salem, Eugene out number the rest of the state and generally vote dem.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Wild, thanks for the input, think im gonna try and read a little more about this and other rcv initiatives. Would love to be able to understand how they pass and fail in case my state decides to put it on the ballot in the future.

[–] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Colorado just shot down RCV like 60-40 and it’s infuriating

[–] rmuk@feddit.uk 1 points 3 days ago

Same thing happened here in the UK years ago. "Want to make out democracy better?" "Nah, mate."

[–] echo@lemmings.world 18 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Meanwhile, the state initiative to pass RCV crashed and burned. :(

[–] AreaKode@lemmy.world 19 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Missouri just voted to ban RCV!

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

This article is literally why. Political outsider with popular policies won, do you know how much money a voting system that does this will cost the people writing those laws?

[–] Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Because money not spent/earned is money not lost.

[–] echo@lemmings.world 2 points 3 days ago

I wish I could say I'm surprised...

[–] sfunk1x@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Probably because it was incomplete for reasons unknown. I'm not sure why, but we get really bad ballot measures. 118 was super terrible, and 117 was seemingly unfinished.

Interestingly, we had extremely low turnout in the local elections. Apparently RCV, or the sheer number of candidates (over 100 for 12 positions), or a combination of both contributed to very low turnout. There were more people voting for POTUS than any of the local candidates, which is a little disappointing. I'll dig into the numbers this weekend.

[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

The new form of city government meant there was a significant number of candidates to parse through. And ranking several instead of picking just one favorite also added time. It took me several days to do my due diligence on all the measures and candidates when before I could usually get it all done in one.

Not complaining, though I could imagine people who don't take voting seriously easily getting impatient/overwhelmed.

[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I’m still pissed that Coloradans voted down RCV on the ballot this season.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 14 points 3 days ago (3 children)

So did the rest of Oregon and it wasn't even close. Too many people fell for the "it's too confusing" propaganda, which is just another way to call the voters dumb, but maybe they're not wrong.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Its just corporations having it both ways:

When corporations benefit: Americans can read like 900 pages of fine print a minute and are all legal scholars.

When it doesn't benefit corps: Americans are cows, its offensive you're trying to make these morons fill out multiple choice papers, they might accidentally poke out an eye on the pens.

Reality: people have limits but RCV ballots are not too complicated. We see it all the time with roundabouts: when new one is put in a few drivers take some time to adjust but eventually they figure it out.

The change is harder to deal with than the actual thing.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

which is just another way to call the voters dumb, but maybe they're not wrong.

Given the outcome of the federal election, I'm increasingly convinced of that point.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I don’t know how it’s confusing.

Rank your top 5 favorite foods.

If you can do this, you can do ranked choice voting.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 2 points 3 days ago

Rank your top 5 favorite foods.

See, you already lost me in all this confusion. I don't know what I'm supposed to do.

Counting to five, too complicated for voters.

[–] brlemworld@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Missouri too 😭 ... Well, worse. Missouri made it illegal.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Great! Next bring progressive change to Salem!

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 2 points 3 days ago

Fat chance. Kotek and the rest of the neoliberals have the state locked down.