I’m all for ranked choice voting, but eliminating FPTP and a two party system doesn’t fix as much as people pretend it does. Using Bernie Sanders as an example, if Sanders found a way through the primaries he would have stood a good chance in FPTP. But he would have stood no chance whatsoever with ranked choice voting, because he would have been overshadowed by objectively more popular candidates. The truth is Biden got into office because he was popular. He wasn’t my choice and he wasn’t many of your choices. But all over the country there were aging Biden supporters that looked at him like he was the only option. Ranked choice voting doesn’t really change that. A great many Biden supporters hated Bernie. Bernie Sanders wouldn’t have won a general election in ranked choice, because he wasn’t popular enough and had no moneyed interests behind him. If anything FPTP presented the best option for Sanders to get past the post exactly because overall popularity doesn’t matter as much as just being slightly better than the other guy in a general election and voter apathy in the primary.
Additionally, having lived through several ranked choice votes in local elections I haven’t seen even a slight improvement in outcomes. The same moderate milquetoast candidates win time and again with messages that exploit fear of change more than hopeful messages of the future.
We would have to get money both out of politics and out of journalism before someone further left has any chance of winning nationally. We also need to do the grassroots work to change peoples minds on policy in general, and put good politicians up and down the ticket. All the paid fearmongering around left wing policy does more damage than FPTP ever could, imo. Changing voting structures doesn’t change voters policy views.
End FPTP and electoral college. They were racist victorian policies anyway
How do we do that without voting?
How do you do that with voting?
Thanks. That’s what I meant. I’m old.
Victorian? Sorry, no. Late Enlightenment, Georgian, or US Colonial periods are more appropriate terms.
I’m all for ranked choice voting, but eliminating FPTP and a two party system doesn’t fix as much as people pretend it does. Using Bernie Sanders as an example, if Sanders found a way through the primaries he would have stood a good chance in FPTP. But he would have stood no chance whatsoever with ranked choice voting, because he would have been overshadowed by objectively more popular candidates. The truth is Biden got into office because he was popular. He wasn’t my choice and he wasn’t many of your choices. But all over the country there were aging Biden supporters that looked at him like he was the only option. Ranked choice voting doesn’t really change that. A great many Biden supporters hated Bernie. Bernie Sanders wouldn’t have won a general election in ranked choice, because he wasn’t popular enough and had no moneyed interests behind him. If anything FPTP presented the best option for Sanders to get past the post exactly because overall popularity doesn’t matter as much as just being slightly better than the other guy in a general election and voter apathy in the primary.
Additionally, having lived through several ranked choice votes in local elections I haven’t seen even a slight improvement in outcomes. The same moderate milquetoast candidates win time and again with messages that exploit fear of change more than hopeful messages of the future.
We would have to get money both out of politics and out of journalism before someone further left has any chance of winning nationally. We also need to do the grassroots work to change peoples minds on policy in general, and put good politicians up and down the ticket. All the paid fearmongering around left wing policy does more damage than FPTP ever could, imo. Changing voting structures doesn’t change voters policy views.