• this is a meta-commentary post about a prevailing sentiment that results in spam in this community.
  • i support ranked choice voting/STAR voting. and you should too!
  • go to https://fairvote.org/ranked-choice-voting-legislation/ to learn more and find legislation you can campaign for in your region.

but i swear by this point, we know. we are aware. the same point doesn’t need to be spammed every 3 comments. if it was as easy to overcome as copypasting the same four paragraphs every post, we’d have thrown off this oppression by now.

this wouldn’t be a problem if the spam wasn’t inserted into the most irrelevant of spaces. people are dying, their rights are being stripped. and yes, RCV would help this but politics is about working within the confines of current reality, not a hypothetical scenario where we fixed things 6 years ago.

just cool it with the spam. engage with each other as humans, not concepts to be dealt with.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’d think we’d want to get rid of the Electoral College first. Yeah? Or no?

    From a messaging standpoint I’d think it’d be difficult to change both at once. But either would be helpful, yes.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      i think no? speaking as a non-expert i believe some local and state governments have RCV already implemented. and of course the electoral college is federal only. imo both should happen, but the order might not be altogether important.

      • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The electoral college is a huge problem. Suppose a largish states introduces RCV and ends up electing third party in a presidential election. Now if neither candidate reaches enough electors, the election is tossed to Congress.

        RCV is a great solution for state-level/local elections, but at the national level you will first want to change the system.

        • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          this makes a lot of sense. thanks for your clarification and example. :)

    • EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Technically we’re a lot closer to that one at the moment. Well, not directly abolishing the Electoral College per se. I don’t have the details handy at the moment because I’m on mobile and my phone keeps closing my Lemmy client when i try to tab out to do anything and I lose my comment.

      But if you don’t know about it, there’s this thing called something like the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Basically it’s an agreement where states that have signed onto it pledge to give their Electors to whoever wins the national popular vote. It’s set to take effect as soon as enough states sign on that they account for the 50%+1 electors to win the college. I’m sure I’m not going to get the number right but I wanna say last I knew they were like 20 something short?