- Sep 14, 2000
- 963
- 380
- 136
So I guess the ostensible point of it is to get the two most popular candidates on the ballot. But why restrict it to two, if I am understanding the California one properly?
So I guess the ostensible point of it is to get the two most popular candidates on the ballot. But why restrict it to two, if I am understanding the California one properly?
So the winner has to get a majority. It basically the same thing as Georgia's runoff system, except designed to have "runoff" on the highest turn out day.So I guess the ostensible point of it is to get the two most popular candidates on the ballot. But why restrict it to two, if I am understanding the California one properly?
Ranked choice voting is so important.So the winner has to get a majority. It basically the same thing as Georgia's runoff system, except designed to have "runoff" on the highest turn out day.
The primary should actually be top 2 with ranked choice voting, though.
It also allows an incumbent to be replaced with someone from the same party.
Ranked choice voting is so important.
Doing an event with a group later next week to educate locals on ranked choice voting so they support it.
We are trying to get ranked choice voting passed in the state legislature, but also get as many towns as possible to make trigger laws for it
Really? Did not know that. Was that In the state legislature?I was pretty disappointed when MA didn’t pass it
Statewide ballot initiative.Really? Did not know that. Was that In the state legislature?
Awww fuck.Statewide ballot initiative.