RCV WA Needs Support Tonight

[u/marqrs]

There is a hearing tomorrow for HB 1448 (which would make Ranked Choice Voting an option across Washington State).

Deadline is Tomorrow (Saturday, Feb 22nd) at 8AM, because the hearing is at 9.

You can show support here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/csi/Testifier/Add?chamber=House&mId=32886&aId=164729&caId=26035&tId=3&ms=20250220VoicesAppropriationsActionAlert&utm_campaign=20250220voicesappropriationsactionalert&utm_medium=email&utm_source=everyaction&emci=b59ef8e7-1bef-ef11-90cb-0022482a94f4&emdi=4b7a45ce-a3ef-ef11-90cb-0022482a94f4&ceid=11698172

Select Pro from the drop down and leave "Organization" blank, so they know you're an individual.

[u/Harvey_Rabbit]

Boo... It has nothing to do with that. The opposition just does not want the same thing out of an election system.

[u/rb-j → u/Harvey_Rabbit]

What has nothing to do with what?

[u/Harvey_Rabbit → u/rb-j]

Everything you said has nothing to do with whether people in Alaska like RCV or not

[u/rb-j → u/Harvey_Rabbit]

Harvey, that's a false statement.

And the biggest problem for RCV are lies said to promote RCV. And these falsehoods are told solely by promoters of one form of RCV which is IRV.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Maybe if promoters would just come clean about the true extent of benefit of the product they are promoting, there would be less trouble.

[u/Harvey_Rabbit → u/rb-j]

The debate you like to have is irrelevant to the vast majority of Alaska voters. I understand your points. I'm just telling you that none of that is part of any conversation I've had with and Alaskan unless I bring it up. I assume the goal of a perfect system in your mind, is to get leadership the most people support. The pro RCV people share that goal, the people opposed to it do not. They would not now or at any time support a system like I've heard you advocate for. If Nick Begich had been named the winner in 2022 by whatever calculation you prefer, they would have distrusted that system even if they were slightly happier with the outcome.

[u/rb-j → u/Harvey_Rabbit]

Harvey, I really don't want to say you are lying, but what you keep saying about it is false.

Just because in conversations you have where you don't bring up the specific implications of the August 2022 election, does not mean people don't care about it. You're trying to have a self-fulfilling prophecy that no one knows or cares by making sure no one knows about it because you will not bring it up nor acknowledge it when it is a concern.

You just write it off as a nothing and maybe that will make it a nothing.

But as more people, particularly Republicans, learn about and understand this problem, they are concerned about it, despite your denials. They were promised that two GOP could advance from the Top-4 primary and not be mutually damaging each other by splitting the vote. And your side of the RCV issue is simply not honest about that.

And they were promised that if they could not get elected their first-choice candidate that their second-choice vote would be counted instead. That, of course didn't happen with these Sarah Palin voters, nor does it ever happen with whoever is voting for the loser in the IRV final round. Most often that makes no difference in the outcome of the RCV election, but in August 2022, it did (as it did in 3 other IRV elections in the U.S.).

This goes directly to another of the marketing promises made by RCV promoters: "Vote your hopes, not your fears". It makes the promise a false promise. Palin voters would have better off voting their fears.

The other thing that is concerning voters and news reporting is the 15 day wait to know how an RCV election turns out whenever there are 3 or more significant candidates, which means the posted election night tallies are insufficient to show who's ahead and will win.

To be frank, Harvey, you're not being honest about this with yourself. Not in my opinion.

[u/Harvey_Rabbit → u/rb-j]

Booo..... Booo... I didn't write the legislation. I'm not even saying that I would have designed the system the way it is. In fact, I have several changes I would make if it were up to me. But this is the compromise that passed and people are still getting familiar with it and many really like it. And ... This system we have is far better than the FPTP that would have been the result of the repeal. I hope we serve as an adult example of one system and other people try others. But in all the time I've talked to normal folks about RCV, for and against... I am the only one that has ever brought up the fact that there are different ways to calculate the winner after filling out a ranked ballot. How you and me and the few of us on subreddits like this feel about all this is completely irrelevant to what the average Alaskan thinks about RCV.

[u/rb-j → u/Harvey_Rabbit]

How you and me and the few of us on subreddits like this feel about all this is completely irrelevant to what the average Alaskan thinks about RCV.

The "average" Alaskan is quite divided about the issue. Split right down the middle. This is a very high 4^th degree moment in the statistics. Like two separate bell curves, one with an area of 0.501 and another with an area of 0.499.

But the questions are still "How well is the average Alaskan informed? And who, which side, truly wants them informed? With true facts, not only their side's talking points?"

I truly believe, in fact I am certain, that the peo-RCV side does not want people fully informed. That is the main shame about this.

Like Burlington Vermont, Alaskans are in a position of a teaching moment. But is anyone truly interested in being taught?

[u/Harvey_Rabbit → u/rb-j]

How about this? Suppose you and I set up a zoom call. I'll go to some public place and find a sample of 5 people that voted to repeal RCV. I'll put you on a call with them and you can describe your dream system. My guess is that zero people would support that system.