this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
860 points (98.6% liked)

Political Memes

5601 readers
3129 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago (4 children)

STAR voting actually accomplishes what ranked choice aims to do.

[–] rigatti@lemmy.world 56 points 7 months ago (1 children)

At this point I'll take any improvement

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

At this point, when any proposal is put forth, you have to ask yourself if it's worse than what we currently have?

Proposal: Congressmen can challenge each other to fist fights. Senators can do the same, but have the option to use a knife.

Sure, it sounds insane, but is it worse?

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago

Bring back duels for federal office! Worked for Burr!

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 7 months ago

I don't know about worse. Make it a public spectacle, sell tickets, take bets, and cheer on your favorite blood thirsty politician.

We can all have popcorn when we watch "FIGHT NIGHT IN CONGRESS!"

[–] wandermind@sopuli.xyz 23 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

My main problem with STAR is that it seems to me like you should always give the highest available score to all candidates you don't mind winning and give the other candidates a zero, because you know there are people giving the highest possible score to your dispreferred candidates and you want to offset their score total as much as possible.

So I feel like strategic voting would mostly trivialize STAR into a form of approval voting, which would still overly benefit the powers-that-be since most people would approve of the established candidates while fewer people would approve of the other candidates, who might be able to eke out a majority in ranked choice voting since they might be higher ranked than the established candidates.

But maybe I'm just not seeing the other strategic dimensions to giving the middle scores to some candidates.

Edit: The link by @themeatbridge is a very good explanation of the benefits of STAR over ranked choice voting! I for one am convinced.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

That's a viable voting strategy, if you're voting against one specific candidate. But how often does that happen, where a voter truly has no preference between two candidates? But that's hardly ever the case, and STAR voting strongly discourages running that kind of capaigning. Candidates want to build coalitions and find common ground, but also differentiate themselves without coming across as negative.

https://www.equal.vote/star_vs_rcv

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

Nah, doing that will actually make your ballot less useful in cases where you approve of both the candidates that made it to a runoff round, because you ranked them both the same, and thus your ballot can't count as a "vote" for either since you indicated no preference.

For single winner this is will probably be a rare issue but for multiwinner, which is what I want, that could end up biting you as the margins close in for the last seat

[–] Natanael 1 points 7 months ago

Ranked choice voting with room for blank spaces?

Haven't done the math on how that would behave exactly, but you could effectively weight the rank of one group of candidates higher and one group lower while your total contribution is still the same, which has a similar effect as you mentioned with STAR but still forces a relative ranking to show preferences in between candidates you approve of and those you disapprove of.

[–] daltotron@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Ahaha, yes, but have you perhaps considered the schulze method?

[–] Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Would STAR voting be your preferred voting method? If so, why's that?

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Most any voting system would be better than what we have, but STAR is one that accomplishes the most. Several states and local governments have adopted Ramked Choice voting, only to face pushback when people realize that they still need to be strategic with their votes or risk being uncounted. With STAR, voters can be honest about their preferences, every vote is always counted, and there is less risk of spoiled ballots because of voter error. Votes can be counted locally and tabulated later, and fraud is harder to conceal.

Here's more info on how it works and why it's better for voters:

https://www.starvoting.org/star