this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2024
1284 points (99.0% liked)
memes
9699 readers
4127 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They still legislate to make their advantage even greater.
For example, they set eligibility requirements that are trivial to multi billion dollar private corporations such as themselves, but difficult to insurmountable to anyone running for a third party or as independents.
Hell, some states including California, Colorado and Illinois may even make ballot access for third parties and independent candidates contingent on approval from establishment party members!
I completely agree with you on eliminating fptp voting, but I much prefer STAR voting to instant runoff.
What advantages does STAR have that instant runoff doesn't?
With the 0-5 star ranking that lets you rank more than one candidate the same if you want to, results are much more likely to accurately reflect the priorities of voters than straight ranking that doesn't.
If for example I give the far left candidate 5 stars, the center-left candidate 3 stars and both the centrist and the center-right candidate 2 stars, then the result of that round will more accurately reflect my priorities than if I had to rank two choices I (dis)like equally differently.
If I give the communist party 5 stars and the moderates 1 star, I'm still giving the moderates points that might cause them to enter the final when the communists could have won. In order to give the communists the absolute best chance of winning, I should give everyone else 0 stars. This is a bad idea if the reactionaries are in a decent place to win, but if I think the parties I hate are definitely going to lose, I should vote dishonesty. If everyone does this, it might cost us all the election.
In instant runoff, I don't have to worry about dishonesty or strategic voting. I just put my second preference second, and there's no way it can hurt my first preference. I vote for the way I actually feel.
Yeah, that's not actually how it works.. You don't get to see and react to everyone else's ballots and if you're not voting honestly, you're fucking yourself and others like you.
Which is something you can do on purpose with eqaul ease in instant runoff and run a greater risk of the spoiler effect happening without you meaning to. Much smaller than with fptp, but still greater than with STAR.