I voted. California primaries 2018

Not sure exactly when it all changed but the primaries in California are daft. They call it the jungle system.
We no longer have choice between two parties. What happens is all running  for office are on a general ballot and the top two vote getters for that position square off down the road. Whoever gets the most from that is elected.
It's such a daft system. It basically allows for the same party to rule unchecked.  It's allowed for  perpetual mismanagement  of everything at local and state levels. At what point will people say enough?

Yes, vote early and often... 8)

You might be shocked but MS has a more normal primary.  (I like that I have a polling place within walking distance of my casa.)

There are some aspects about the jungle primary I like, namely that the political parties don't control who gets to run in the general, but I suspect what is going on this year is an unintended consequence of how upset democrats are about President Trump. Just like a third party candidate can siphon votes away from a potential winner, too many candidates in a jungle system could lead to no one from that same party with all the candidates getting enough votes to make the cut, ironically helping the less active party candidates.

The whole process is sloppy but we are not a simple democracy (AKA a lynch mob) so inefficiency could be a good thing (or not).  8)

JR

PS: I read that vote turnout in Iraq was lower than previous votes. At 44% that is about like our mid term election voter turnout, or not very good in other words.  :'( Apparently we are not the only voters who dislike the political elite.

FWIW: Maine is voting for/against Ranked Choice Voting. You pick a 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc choice. If none of the 1st choice get 50%.... well, they recount with lesser choices though don't ask me for details.

This follows a couple of 3-way governor elections with a ~~45% win, who is both widely admired and widely reviled.

RCV is supposed to be "better". I don't know that RCV has *ever* been used for ANYthing, and suspect the Game Theory behind it is not fully developed. That there will be ways to cheat the system. (Of course the old System was widely cheated to get RCV on and off the table about three times; next week's vote is to confirm a strong People Referendum a couple years ago which is being blocked in the legislature and argued up and down the courts.)

_I_ think a simple plurality should be good enough. Has been for centuries. Though Maine History and law has had trouble with the distinction between Plurality and Majority. (There seems to be a 2-choice presumption, but our society has become many-flavored, and the two Tammany Halls are not claiming the whole pie.)

If we do this, and it actually matters (many issues, it won't) then it will be new fodder for the breathless news commentaters. (Not as bad as the western(?) mayor who just stayed in office after zero votes...)

I prefer having the minimum of 1 candidate per party that way we have an illusion of choice

Yes voting is somewhat an exercise in participation for effect, there will always be power brokers behind closed doors trying to run the show. I think the current POTUS is operating outside the norms of typical political party hegemony, so upsetting to all the political elites from both sides. 

I am not smart enough to fix it, many other wheels squeaking louder it seems to moi.

JR

PS: I just got a robo-call from a candidate I already voted for. Lucky for him... if he called me  earlier today I would have voted for the other guy... :

Having a ranking system would be beneficial imo.  It allows people to vote for who they actually want without feeling they are "throwing their vote away" or allowing someone they really don't like to win.

Doubtful the two party (really one party)  elite ever allows it to happen.  As it would allow quality candidates an actual fighting chance to win.

Imagine an election where you actually had to win on merit and not simply being less worse than the other guy.

john12ax7 said:

Imagine an election where you actually had to win on merit and not simply being less worse than the other guy.

Click to expand...

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

JohnRoberts said:

PS: I just got a robo-call from a candidate I already voted for. Lucky for him... if he called me  earlier today I would have voted for the other guy... :

Click to expand...

Hmmm, suppose you are "the other guy". You hire a marketing company to robocall in support for your competitor. Everybody hates robocalls, so they all vote for "the other guy", you. 8)

It wouldn't surprise me if this isn't already done.

Gene

Im not sure what they call the system here ,but in elections your presented a ballot paper with all the candidates names and pictures on it ,each runner has a box beside their name , what you do is mark your top candidate 1 second choice 2 etc ,you can go right down the list and give each person a number if you like , then when it goes into the count the first preference votes are counted  ,and they gradually fill the the number of 'Dail' seats for the constituency. Theres some other weirdness they do using second/third preference votes and transfers which I dont really understand. Ive been complaining about the use of regular pencils in voting booths here for years ,last time out in the referendum they had what looked like a black colouring pencil ,with a wax based crayon type core. The ballot boxes here are very flimsy plastic ,with a slot you could easy get your hand down into. Not sure why they got rid of the original heavy metal ones ,which are still used at other locations .

PRR said:

RCV is supposed to be "better". I don't know that RCV has *ever* been used for ANYthing, and suspect the Game Theory behind it is not fully developed. That there will be ways to cheat the system. (Of course the old System was widely cheated to get RCV on and off the table about three times; next week's vote is to confirm a strong People Referendum a couple years ago which is being blocked in the legislature and argued up and down the courts.)

Click to expand...

RCV should allow for more support for third parties, without requiring voters to be perpetually making Sophie's Choices, as you can vote third party ranked first and have your 'next runner up' receive your vote  if the third party doesn't surpass majority status.

Of all of the evils with voting, I think this has the fewest downsides, especially for nation and state level elections.

pucho812 said:

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

Click to expand...

actually if you think about it logically you are voting to prevent the worse evil from winning.

Honest men (or women) generally don't run for office, because you can't get elected telling only truth.

JR

Gene Pink said:

Hmmm, suppose you are "the other guy". You hire a marketing company to robocall in support for your competitor. Everybody hates robocalls, so they all vote for "the other guy", you. 8)

It wouldn't surprise me if this isn't already done.

Gene

Click to expand...

There is a variant on that where they masquerade as a survey asking objective questions but the questions are leading and suggestive of bad behavior or undesirable attributes to throw shade on one side vs the other. 

I don't even slam the phone down these days, I just lie it down gently so they can listen to my TV for a while.  :

JR

Tubetec said:

Im not sure what they call the system here ,but in elections your presented a ballot paper with all the candidates names and pictures on it ,each runner has a box beside their name , what you do is mark your top candidate 1 second choice 2 etc ,you can go right down the list and give each person a number if you like , then when it goes into the count the first preference votes are counted  ,and they gradually fill the the number of 'Dail' seats for the constituency. Theres some other weirdness they do using second/third preference votes and transfers which I dont really understand. Ive been complaining about the use of regular pencils in voting booths here for years ,last time out in the referendum they had what looked like a black colouring pencil ,with a wax based crayon type core. The ballot boxes here are very flimsy plastic ,with a slot you could easy get your hand down into. Not sure why they got rid of the original heavy metal ones ,which are still used at other locations .

Click to expand...

It was always known in Ireland as proportional representation but apparently what we have is a subset of that called "Single Transferable Vote", not a phrase I can ever remember hearing when I lived there. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote

What's the difference between a primary and a general election in CA if you can vote for any candidate regardless of party in both the primary and the general? I guess the general only has two candidates but the two candidates are the top two vote getters. I don't get it.

Gold said:

What's the difference between a primary and a general election in CA if you can vote for any candidate regardless of party in both the primary and the general? I guess the general only has two candidates but the two candidates are the top two vote getters. I don't get it.

Click to expand...

By winnowing down the number of candidates to the top couple, media can have the time to find all the skeletons in their closets easier.

There may be logistical (cost) problems from too many candidates in general elections. If the winner gets less than the majority of votes (spread between several candidates) the result may get less respect from voters. Limiting the number of candidates to only two, insures that one will receive a simple majority.

A lot about our vote system is about providing faith in the outcome while that has dropped in recent years and people question arcane systems (like electoral college).

JR

The map from yesterday's voting...

Tubetec said:

Im not sure what they call the system here ....

Click to expand...

Where is "here"?

Here for me is Ireland PRR .

And thanks Ruairi for digging out the 'Single transferable vote' thing , its not a phrase Ive heard before either .

https://twitter.com/JurassicNPS/status/1004211168259391488

tands said:

https://twitter.com/JurassicNPS/status/1004211168259391488

Click to expand...

They had one job and screwed it up. Fortunately although a big number,  not enough to sway any of the outcomes, I think.