Strange that the comments on this video are misinformation about the perils that await a populace allowed to rank their choices. I'm impressed that Alaskans pushed ranked choice voting through against the will of entrenched politicians.
Strange that you would make your own comment thread instead of replying to the one you objected to, considering there are only like 5 replies. 1 voter-1 vote systems consolidate voting power at each individual voter, whereas 1 voter-4 (ranked) votes (or whatever the number ends up being in a given district) distributes the weight of those votes across the entire voting block. Ranked choice is the furthest thing from a strengthening of voting power. It is a weakening of that voting power, through dilution.
Ranked choice is nothing more than clever marketing term for a terrible idea that, in the end, represents the constituents in a given community even LESS effectively than they are currently. "See?! 16,777,000 possible choices! So many choices! You want choices? You get all the choices!" Alaska only has 537,615 registered voters, so instead of a straight-line Yea/Nay vote on an issue, where their individual vote has a 1 in 2 chance of falling in line with their votes on a given topic/candidate, those 537k voters are now having their individual votes diluted to a ratio of effectively 1 in 16,777,000? Why on earth would any voter ever want their vote to be diluted in this way? Your odds are much better hitting the jackpot in the state lottery! Ranked choice is a dilution of your individual vote, not a strengthening of it.
@@stfon5their claim is a red herring. Go look up a ranked choice voting 101 video and you'll see that either this person grossly misunderstood what it was or is purposely throwing out red herrings to scare people
Least representative voting method period . "Ranked choice voting claims to protect majority rule, but in reality, ranked choice voting merely creates an artificial majority. One study of elections in Maine found that, of 98 recent ranked choice voting elections, 60% of ranked choice voting victors did not win with a majority of the total votes cast. By the final round of one San Francisco local election, more ballots had been thrown out than were counted toward the winner’s total." Tabulation in Alaska took 8 times longer ( over 2 weeks ) due to how the votes are counted. In England someone won with less than 10% of the vote even tho other people got more votes they won due to each successive round the lowest being eliminated and added to the next persons tabulation over and over. No thanks.
Strange that the comments on this video are misinformation about the perils that await a populace allowed to rank their choices. I'm impressed that Alaskans pushed ranked choice voting through against the will of entrenched politicians.
Strange that you would make your own comment thread instead of replying to the one you objected to, considering there are only like 5 replies.
1 voter-1 vote systems consolidate voting power at each individual voter, whereas 1 voter-4 (ranked) votes (or whatever the number ends up being in a given district) distributes the weight of those votes across the entire voting block.
Ranked choice is the furthest thing from a strengthening of voting power. It is a weakening of that voting power, through dilution.
Ranked choice is nothing more than clever marketing term for a terrible idea that, in the end, represents the constituents in a given community even LESS effectively than they are currently.
"See?! 16,777,000 possible choices! So many choices! You want choices? You get all the choices!"
Alaska only has 537,615 registered voters, so instead of a straight-line Yea/Nay vote on an issue, where their individual vote has a 1 in 2 chance of falling in line with their votes on a given topic/candidate, those 537k voters are now having their individual votes diluted to a ratio of effectively 1 in 16,777,000?
Why on earth would any voter ever want their vote to be diluted in this way?
Your odds are much better hitting the jackpot in the state lottery!
Ranked choice is a dilution of your individual vote, not a strengthening of it.
Anyone have a counter to this argument? Civil discourse rules please. I just want to find the truth
What other voting methods are there? I honestly don't have a clue
@@stfon5their claim is a red herring. Go look up a ranked choice voting 101 video and you'll see that either this person grossly misunderstood what it was or is purposely throwing out red herrings to scare people
Least representative voting method period . "Ranked choice voting claims to protect majority rule, but in reality, ranked choice voting merely creates an artificial majority. One study of elections in Maine found that, of 98 recent ranked choice voting elections, 60% of ranked choice voting victors did not win with a majority of the total votes cast. By the final round of one San Francisco local election, more ballots had been thrown out than were counted toward the winner’s total." Tabulation in Alaska took 8 times longer ( over 2 weeks ) due to how the votes are counted. In England someone won with less than 10% of the vote even tho other people got more votes they won due to each successive round the lowest being eliminated and added to the next persons tabulation over and over. No thanks.