This looks like Single Transferable Vote (STV) and is used in Irish
parliamentary elections, combined with multi-member electorates.

In New Zealand we use it in local body (Council) elections and for Hospital
Boards etc. It is a better system I think but not a total fix. Party
funding is still going to influence how much different party messages get
out.

Comradely,
John

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024, 11:24 Charles Keener via groups.io, <ckeener20005=
[email protected]> wrote:

>
> It's time for real democracy.
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
>  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌  ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
> [image: Stein Ware People Planet Peace]
>
> If you’re like us, you’re probably sick and tired of hearing the
> propaganda that voting for Jill Stein and other Green candidates means
> you’re “spoiling the election” or “wasting your vote.” The political and
> media establishment promotes “spoiler” hysteria to scare people away from
> voting for what they actually want, and to keep people voting for a
> two-party system that doesn’t serve their interests. But what they don’t
> want people to know is that there’s a simple upgrade to our voting system
> that would make “spoiler” hysteria obsolete: Ranked-Choice Voting.
>
> For years now, polls have shown that a huge majority - roughly 60% - of
> Americans believe the two-party system doesn’t represent them, and we need
> a new major party. Yet despite their unpopularity, the same two parties
> maintain a stranglehold on power by campaigning on the same message: “The
> other party is worse, so you have to vote for us as the lesser evil.”
> Instead of earning votes by working to improve voters’ lives, they can
> extort votes by threatening that the other side will be worse.
>
> This two-party trap has led our country to a bad place: endless war and
> genocide, social and economic breakdown, climate collapse, and a democracy
> on life support. But it doesn’t have to be this way, and ranked-choice
> voting can change the game.
>
> <https://www.jillstein2024.com/?e=2ca9ac1b1fa0e97aeeea14035f0f6d5f&utm_source=jillsteinforpresident&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ranked_choice_voting&n=1>
>
> With ranked-choice voting (RCV) you can vote for your favorite candidates
> without any worry about "wasting your vote," "splitting the vote" or
> "spoiling" an election. It’s simple: You can rank your 1st choice, 2nd
> choice, and so on, and if your 1st choice doesn't win, your vote goes to
> your 2nd choice. This process continues until one candidate wins a majority
> - and they can't win with less than 50%, which has happened in 4 of the
> last 8 Presidential elections.
>
> Decade after decade of lesser-evil voting has enabled both establishment
> parties to do less and less for the people and cater to the demands of
> their wealthy elite donors. RCV can break this vicious cycle by freeing
> people to vote FOR what they actually want, rather than AGAINST what they
> fear. That would give voters real choice and real power.
>
> In the Green Party, we’ve been fighting for ranked-choice voting for
> decades, but the politicians in power refuse to pass it because they don’t
> want you to have a real choice. And that’s one more reason they don’t
> deserve your vote. In fact, there’s been a concerted effort to suppress RCV
> by politicians like CA governor Gavin Newsom, who in 2019 vetoed a popular
> bill to expand use of RCV in California.
>
> Despite establishment opposition, the movement for RCV has made steady
> progress, passing forms of RCV in over 50 cities and counties across the
> country, as well as the state of Maine. Communities that use RCV have
> higher turnout and happier voters. That's because RCV is a win-win-win
> for voters: it promotes majority rule, discourages negative campaigning,
> and means voters don't have to worry about "splitting the vote."
>
> RCV is a gamechanger, but it’s also just a first step towards revitalizing
> our democracy to empower the people. Another critically-needed reform is
> proportional representation for legislative elections, a type of system
> used in most democracies around the world where if a party gets 25% of the
> vote, they take 25% of the seats. Proportional representation produces
> governments that are more representative and responsive, and allows for
> healthy multi-party democracy where the true diversity of a society can be
> fairly represented.
>
> As the movement for RCV gains momentum, however, we have to be careful
> about attempts to co-opt voters’ enthusiasm for changing the broken system.
> In recent years, we’ve seen a well-funded effort to conflate RCV with “Top
> 4” primaries, which began in CA and WA as “Top 2” primaries. Now there are
> ballot measures in several states that include variants of “Top 4,” which
> are marketed as “open primaries,” along with a distorted and diluted form
> of RCV.
>
> The problem is, similar to “Top 2,” the “Top 4” system requires “jungle
> primaries” that put candidates of all parties together and eliminates all
> but the top 4 vote-getters, which massively tilts the playing field towards
> well-funded, establishment-backed candidates with the resources to turn out
> a large primary vote. To make things worse, these primaries don’t even use
> RCV, making them no better than elections under the existing broken system.
>
> A better name for “Top 4” primaries would be “limited-choice voting,” when
> what we need is the opposite: more voices and more choices. But this
> well-funded “reform” appears to be aimed at co-opting the movement for RCV
> to further entrench the two-party system and pay-to-play politics. And
> while genuine RCV can be a stepping stone to proportional representation,
> “Top 4” would perpetuate the system of single-seat elections, which would
> be an obstacle to enacting proportional representation.
>
> For all these reasons, in 2024 *we fully support ballot measures for
> genuine ranked-choice voting* in Oregon (Measure 117) and multiple cities
> including Washington DC (Initiative 83), Richmond CA (Measure L), Oak Park
> IL and Peoria IL; and *we oppose measures for “Top 4” primaries* in
> Colorado (Proposition 131) and Idaho (Proposition 1), and “Top 5” in Nevada
> (Question 3).
>
> It’s clearer than ever that we urgently need a voting system that frees us
> all to vote for what we want, not just against what we fear. Democracy
> needs a moral compass, and that compass is our values. If we can't vote our
> values, we're lost at sea.
>
> It's time to break free from the 2-party trap and bring real democracy to
> America with ranked-choice voting. Every vote for our campaign helps to
> build the demand for a world where we can all forget the “lesser evil,” and
> vote for the greater good like our lives depend on it - because they do.
>
> Thank you for everything you do to power up this movement for real
> democracy!
>
> In solidarity and gratitude,
>
> The Stein/Ware 2024 Team
> 
>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#33325): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/33325
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/109395618/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to