politics @lemmy.world · 11 months ago

House speaker elections can be better with ranked choice voting

fairvote.org

216

House speaker elections can be better with ranked choice voting

fairvote.org

LesserAbe@lemmy.world to

politics @lemmy.world · 11 months ago

House speaker elections can be better with ranked choice voting - FairVote

fairvote.org

The ongoing chaos of the House Speaker election points to the need could transform House leadership elections.

Wouldn’t it be great if you didn’t have to vote for the least horrible candidate? If you could vote for who you wanted without feeling like you’re throwing your vote away?

If we had ranked choice voting, we’d have better legislators in office to start with. And if they used it in the speaker votes this could be resolved already.

Chat

mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
link
fedilink
arrow-up
1·
11 months ago

Ranked Choice, Instant Run-off

Those are the same thing.
- n2burns
  link
  fedilink
  arrow-up
  1·
  11 months ago
  I meant STV, not Ranked Choice. Thanks for your pedantry.
  - mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2·
    11 months ago
    We aim to please.

politics @lemmy.world

politics@lemmy.world

Create a post

You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News