Instant Runoff Voting a Success! November 8, 2006
Posted by hunterp in Instant Runoff Voting, Politics, Voting.1 comment so far
Thanks to fairvote.org I have been educated to the 4 jurisdictions spread accross the country that are voting on whether to stay with the binary voting system. Joining a few jurisdictions in washington and oregon we have 3 of the 4 jurisdictions called:
The master page: http://www.fairvote.org/irv/?page=1840
Pierce County Washington-YES! on Charter Amendment No. 3 http://www.co.pierce.wa.us/pc/abtus/ourorg/aud/elections/misc/currentresults.htm
The City of Minneapolis,Minnesota-YES! on Charter Amendment: Instant Runoff Voting http://www2.co.hennepin.mn.us/elections/results/byrace?el=06GMNHEN&type=7&rid=1251
The City of Oakland-YES! on Measure O
http://www.acgov.org/jsp_app/rov/current_election/nofrace.jsp?f=338112.htm
The City of Davis- still processing on Measure L
http://www.yoloelections.org/returns/davis_l.html
A way forward after NK’s nuke test. October 9, 2006
Posted by hunterp in North Korea, Politics, Voting.add a comment
George W. Bush’s track record is not transparent and fair. This makes me feel that he is a very confused and inept person. I feel ashamed that he has aggravated so many countries a majority of his constituents.
Before the North Korean underground nuke test tonight, I felt that there was hope to limit the power of his republican party come the November 7th elections. Now, however, there is a chance that the republican spin machine will be able to use the North Korean test to their advantage.
I am not here to stop the republicans from winning on November 7th although I’m definitely not for them winning either.
I am here because there is more long term way forward that will begin on that same voting day.
The actual vote tallying system used in jurisdictions in this country is a very very VERY rudimentary system where your vote only counts in a very limited way. As far back as the 17th century, people have designed simple voting systems that are far more fair.
In this new kind system that is actually on the ballots of four U.S jurisdictions comprised of about 1.5 million people a persons vote has the potential to be far more accurate.
Instead of your vote counting for 1 candidate as it does now, these newer systems let you vote for as many candidates as you like. How is this possible? Well, it’s possible to vote by comparing the candidates to each other. For example, imagine a race where there are 4 candidates, instead of voting for 1, you vote for all four by ordering them in a list of most wanted to least wanted.
So, a vote would look something like this:
- Ralph Nader
- Al Gore
- George Bush
One possible outcome is that the second or third place rankings actually drive a candidate over the top. In fact you aren’t even required to list all the candidates.
Isn’t it simple how something so obvious can more fairly represent the true voting preferences of the people.
Please go to www.fairvote.org and donate to help four jurisdictions “with a combined population of well over 1.5 million people: Minneapolis (MN), Pierce County (WA), Davis (CA) and Oakland (CA)”.
