I usually ignore the misinformation, but this one is direct from Forbes, and not just that but direct from Steve Forbes himself, and the directness of the lies are direct enough to be worth noting. A little bit.

It's worth a small shout-out to proportional representation as a much bigger and potentially more effective type of electoral reform.

I'm not completely on board with some of the argument why we can't have RCV because we need some other kind of reform instead. It's not an either-or. Most people in the US who've had RCV like it, and reforming the electoral system and watching it work out well will help to spur future changes in other ways, I think. But I do definitely think that winner-take-all under an RCV system is not the final fix to the system.

Having proportional representation in the US would be a massive improvement. It would be huge. We'd have Green Party people in congress. The flyover states wouldn't get to dominate our politics anymore. Overall it would just be a wonderful thing.

That may mean it won't happen soon, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen.

I have a Google Alert set up for RCV, and I just want to give a small sample of what comes in through it, along with obviously some opinion in favor of it and some news which I sometimes post. This is all from today:

Ranked-choice voting would mark the end of person-to-person democracy -The Gazette (no gazette in particular, just The Gazette)

Think your ballot was cumbersome this year? Just wait for ranked-choice voting -The Denver Post

Do we really want a gang of rich guys to tell us how to do election reform in Colorado? -The Colorado Sun

We should scrap Alaska’s ranked choice voting experiment -Anchorage Daily News

Here you go, here's an olive branch to the "both sides" people. It sounds like, in Nevada, you are correct.