While no single issue should be a litmus test for being a progressive, what could be more progressive than an election system which is more democratic and leads to more voters taking part in elections and enables grassroots candidates an opportunity to compete and sometimes win against Big Money candidates?
The proposal to have three elections in one year, June,September and November would only cause voter fatigue . Why not have RCV which increases voter participation
What is democratic about a very low voter turnout in a December( or September as is being proposed) runoff?? History has shown that these turnouts are a high percentage white ,older and higher income voters. It is confusing to me why anyone would think that a majority of these voters represent the wider electorate
a huge thank you to Supervisor Campos for such an intelligent solution to improve Ranked Choice Voting. More rankings on the ballot will give voters even more choices. I don't know if Supervisor Elsbrnd realizes but he was elected with 50% more voters in his 2004 Ranked Choice Voting election than his predecessor had with a low voter turnout December Run Off
I suppose that Supervisor Elsbernd thinks it is more democratic for a candidate who only has 30 % of the vote (which means 70% of the electorate doesn't want him) to qualify for a run off.Ranked Choice Voting increases voter participation by allowing the voter to rank his preferences after his first choice
An even more low voter turnout election in September? Supervisor Reiner is showing a lack of understanding of the benefits of Ranked Choice Voting which include greatly increased voter participation.
@Admit It: December runoffs were very costly to voters with a very low voter turnout.Voters were older, higher income and mostly white. Why should a very small white electorate be the one to decide who our elected representatives should be?
The San Francisco Examiner
Website powered by Foundation