Ranked Choice is ... RANK

25 posts / 0 new
Last post
Toolsmith
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 33 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2016 - 11:22am
Ranked Choice is ... RANK

Here is a very long, but very interesting, presentation on various decision methods in use by the military... and why they don't work.

https://sites.google.com/site/stephendownesmartin/puppet-mastery

Note that Ranked Choice Voting is one of these defective methods.

Or just go to this, a calculator referred to on the page above, and see how various historic elections would have been different:

http://www1.cse.wustl.edu/~legrand/rbvote/calc.html

Some of the best outcomes we ever had would NOT have happened!!!

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
You realize that elections

You realize that elections are different than military decisions, right?

The whole point of rank choice voting is to be able to do an instantaneous run off election without spending any additional money.

Conservatives don't like it (in Maine) because for the last two elections, the 3rd party candidate has been a liberal (Eliot Cutler). But keep in mind this cuts both ways - and given the Trumpy environment the next 3rd party independent is likely to be conservative.

Matt
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 3 min ago
Joined: 01/21/2008 - 6:21pm
AC, don’t confuse Stoolsmith.

AC, don’t confuse Stoolsmith.

If there were no slow-motion ranked choice in Lewiston, Chin would be mayor!

Bruce Libby
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 47 min ago
Joined: 01/17/2006 - 7:08pm
AC you are correct and that

AC you are correct and that will just piss so many people off.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
The thing I like about rank

The thing I like about rank choice voting is it allows you to vote for a 3rd party without feeling like you're throwing your vote away. If you're not happy w/ the establishment candidates but really just abhor the other side, you can voice your support for a 3rd party that leans your way without giving the election to the opposition.

Gerald Weinand
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 01/28/2014 - 7:41am
While it seems like an easy

While it seems like an easy thing to load vote tallies from previous elections into the ranked choice calculator, such an exercise forgets an important point - voter in those elections did not cast 2nd, 3rd, etc choice votes. TO be fair, some are a slam dunk - it's hard to imagine that many supporters of Libby Mitchell in 2010 would have voted for LePage over Eliot Cutler. But other elections are not so easy.

Ugenetoo
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 38 min ago
Joined: 08/05/2011 - 12:32pm
I'd say that Libby Mitchell's

I'd say that Libby Mitchell's subsequent political victories speak to her suitability as Governor of our fair state.
I doubt she could win an election for dog catcher.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
"While it seems like an easy

"While it seems like an easy thing to load vote tallies from previous elections into the ranked choice calculator, such an exercise forgets an important point - voter in those elections did not cast 2nd, 3rd, etc choice votes. TO be fair, some are a slam dunk - it's hard to imagine that many supporters of Libby Mitchell in 2010 would have voted for LePage over Eliot Cutler. But other elections are not so easy."

This is a fair point. If the 2010 election were held today I would probably rank LePage over Libby Mitchell...

Toolsmith
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 33 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2016 - 11:22am
The article is NOT just about

The article is NOT just about military decisions - that's the author's primary focus, but there are similarities. Most people don't understand how these alternative voting methods work, or how they can produce unexpected results.

Economike
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
Toolsmith -

Toolsmith -

I agree that ranked choice is a game changer, not just like a run-off. It will alter not only the calculations of voters but also of candidates in real time.

I fear it will skew election results toward safe and reliable candidates, driving out innovative ideas and leaving fired-up (minority, plurality) voters feeling excluded.

Al Amoling
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 8 min ago
Joined: 07/07/2004 - 12:01am
In my view it's just a plain

In my view it's just a plain farce perpetrated by people who hate it when their favorite candidate loses.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
"I fear it will skew election

"I fear it will skew election results toward safe and reliable candidates, driving out innovative ideas and leaving fired-up (minority, plurality) voters feeling excluded."

How do you arrive at that conclusion?

If you can vote for a third party candidate knowing full well that if they lose you won't be handing the keys to your mortal enemy, you'll be less likely to settle for a middle of the road candidate.

Example: Let's say you have a real lefty candidate, a moderate conservative (establishment GOP type), and a Trumpy populist.

You like the Trumpy guy the most, and hate the liberal with all of Tom C's vitriol, and can tolerate the moderate. Polls have the liberal at 45%, the conservative at 45%, and Trumpy at 10%.

In a traditional election, you're faced with a dilemma because if you vote for the Trumpy candidate (whom you like the most), you run the risk of handing the election to the liberal. So, if you hate the liberal more than you like the Trumpy, you pretty much have to vote for the Establishment GOP candidate.

In a rank choice election, you can rank Trumpy first, Establishment GOP second, so if the Trumpy guy places 3rd, your vote still goes against the liberal.

The important thing here is that you are able to voice your support for Trumpy, which makes the entire party pay attention.

Economike
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
anon -

anon -

Let's imagine it's 2010 and Maine has ranked-choice voting.

Paul Lepage looks at his poll numbers and drops out of a race he can't possibly win.

I don't contend that this counter-factual example is agreeable or disagreeable. It does illustrate how ranked choice voting will drive the choice among candidates toward the muddled middle.

And, by the way, does anyone else think it's a strange coincidence that "Paul LePage" was a major talking point for ranked-choice advocates?

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
"Let's imagine it's 2010 and

"Let's imagine it's 2010 and Maine has ranked-choice voting.

Paul Lepage looks at his poll numbers and drops out of a race he can't possibly win."

Libby Mitchell had no chance of winning, and she didn't drop out. In fact, it would have benefited her cause to drop out, since it would have essentially guaranteed a Cutler win.

"I don't contend that this counter-factual example is agreeable or disagreeable. It does illustrate how ranked choice voting will drive the choice among candidates toward the muddled middle.

And, by the way, does anyone else think it's a strange coincidence that "Paul LePage" was a major talking point for ranked-choice advocates?"

Like I said before... it was LePage that won last time because Cutler was the liberal third party candidate. But the next third party candidate might be conservative, which would usher in a liberal Democrat without rank choice voting. These things cut both ways.

Economike
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
There's a crucial difference

There's a crucial difference between the in-real-time calculations of candidates Paul LePage and Libby Mitchell.

Let's remember that the Republicans and Democrats always run someone for governor, even when one side or the other is virtually unbeatable.

Mitchell was an insider loyalist, collecting chits regardless. LePage was an outsider upstart who couldn't hope for (or want) a job at the Federal Department of Aged Has-beens. LePage was in it to win.

Your "benefited her cause" makes my point. Yes, Cutler and she were the same "cause." And if LePage had been up against a ranked-choice brick wall of "cause" some Republican insider loyalist, now half-forgotten, would have run in his place. The lesson is that ranked-choice insidiously alters, tending to level, the political terrain.

I heartily agree that such calculations work both ways. Once ranked-choice is in effect, it will take just a few elections for disaffected and exasperated voters of any political type to understand that the system is gamed against them.

Toolsmith
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 33 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2016 - 11:22am
The point of the original

The point of the original article, which some here get and others don't, is that all of the newfangled methods are susceptible to "gaming" and thus will *not* result in a fairy tale land where a fictional progressive/conservative/green wonderperson will magically be elected. It certainly won't do what the voters were told it would.

In the case of this particular type of "gamed" voting, an election that would be divided between diverse groups will be won by the least unpopular common denominator.

If this isn't an unbelievably boring person, I will be surprised.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
@Economike: " LePage was an

@Economike: " LePage was an outsider upstart who couldn't hope for (or want) a job at the Federal Department of Aged Has-beens. LePage was in it to win."

I don't understand. LePage already won the GOP nomination. Do you mean that he would not have won the party nomination of rank choice voting had been implemented at the party level? (It was my assumption that rank choice voting would only be applied at the final election.)

Once LePage sealed up the GOP nomination, the only other competition would be a third party, which would not be an establishment candidate.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
@Toolsmith: "The point of the

@Toolsmith: "The point of the original article, which some here get and others don't, is that all of the newfangled methods are susceptible to "gaming" and thus will *not* result in a fairy tale land where a fictional progressive/conservative/green wonderperson will magically be elected. It certainly won't do what the voters were told it would."

I didn't think that was what the point was. The point of rank choice voting is that you can voice your opinion for a non-establishment candidate (Ralph Nader) whom you didn't really expect to win without handing the election away to your hated enemy (George W. Bush).

I guess you could make the argument (and maybe that's what you guys are trying to say) that the establishment candidate and the party leaders are less likely to move in the direction of a minority view if they know that they are going to win anyway... but the flip side is that way more people will vote for a minority candidate if they don't feel like they are throwing away their vote.

And how strong of a mandate is it if the winning candidate was 40% of his/her supporters second choice?

Economike
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 11/28/2006 - 9:09am
anon -

anon -

I meant that the before choosing to run for governor, in a ranked-choice system, LePage would have calculated that he would lose a three-way race.

I might also note that Cutler, despite his independent status, was more an establishment candidate than LePage.

Islander
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 02/13/2009 - 12:16pm
If LePage had not won this

If LePage had not won this would not be an issue. Baldacci won with less %votes then LePage yet no call to change the way we vote. If it is not broken do not fix it.

Toolsmith
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 33 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2016 - 11:22am
They only whine when they

They only whine when they lose...

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
"If LePage had not won this

"If LePage had not won this would not be an issue. Baldacci won with less %votes then LePage yet no call to change the way we vote. If it is not broken do not fix it."

Conversely, if we had rank choice voting back then, Baldacci would not have ever gotten elected...

Mainelion
Offline
Last seen: 19 min 55 sec ago
Joined: 08/11/2005 - 12:01am
Well, unless John Martin's

Well, unless John Martin's lackeys would have "found" a few boxes of ballots to push him over the top.

Bruce Libby
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 47 min ago
Joined: 01/17/2006 - 7:08pm
As a followup, with Rank

As a followup, with Rank choice their would be more boxes to be found !!

Toolsmith
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 33 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2016 - 11:22am
"If it is not broken do not

"If it is not broken do not fix it."

More like: "If you do not lose do not fix it."

Log in to post comments