Massachusetts Question 1 "Right to Repair" (buy, cost)

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by massnative71

We have it in Maine, you do NOT want it in Mass., thankfully the voters saw right through it. Congrats on #1.

I find the only people against RCV are those benefitting from an 'all or nothing' mindset. RCV encourages voters to focus on their policy concerns and not whether they're aligned with party plurality which, IMO, is good thing. I'm aware of the complaints in Maine and, IMO, I think a lack of understanding is not a valid reason to dismiss a legitimate voting approach.

It's particularly useful in primaries.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

I find the only people against RCV are those benefitting from an 'all or nothing' mindset. RCV encourages voters to focus on their policy concerns and not whether they're aligned with party plurality which, IMO, is good thing. I'm aware of the complaints in Maine and, IMO, I think a lack of understanding is not a valid reason to dismiss a legitimate voting approach.

It's particularly useful in primaries.

As somebody who often votes 3rd party or "blank/write-in", I strongly disagree. Its greatest impact is that it enables flawed/weak candidates, among many. As for the "lack of understanding", well it is what it is. Given the average capability out there on the street, certain things need to be kept "simple".

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by massnative71

As somebody who often votes 3rd party or "blank/write-in", I strongly disagree. Its greatest impact is that it enables flawed/weak candidates, among many. As for the "lack of understanding", well it is what it is. Given the average capability out there on the street, certain things need to be kept "simple".

This why, I suspect, the MA ballot focused on primaries and some state/fed level congressional seats. These races tend to draw a more educated electorate ... traditionally, anyway.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

This why, I suspect, the MA ballot focused on primaries and some state/fed level congressional seats. These races tend to draw a more educated electorate ... traditionally, anyway.

Primaries yes, the latter tend to attract more blind straight party line voters. Either way, I see it as totally backwards where one with less votes can prevail over one with less.

[Lampert]

Originally Posted by massnative71

As somebody who often votes 3rd party or "blank/write-in", I strongly disagree. Its greatest impact is that it enables flawed/weak candidates, among many

What is a weak candidate?
Ranked choice votes great, as long as you want to think about who to vote for longer than 2 minutes.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Lampert

What is a weak candidate?
Ranked choice votes great, as long as you want to think about who to vote for longer than 2 minutes.

You are entitled to your opinion.


A weak candidate is pretty self explanatory.

[Lampert]

Originally Posted by massnative71

You are entitled to your opinion.

Thank you.
I still don't understand what is a weak candidate.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Lampert

Thank you.
I still don't understand what is a weak candidate.

Weak is the opposite of strong, in other words "not strong". A candidate is one seeking a position.

[Lampert]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Weak is the opposite of strong, in other words "not strong". A candidate is one seeking a position.

Let me try, it's a candidate you don't think should win because it's either not a Dem or GOP or has a position that you think shouldn't be the majority.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Lampert

Let me try, it's a candidate you don't think should win because it's either not a Dem or GOP or has a position that you think shouldn't be the majority.

Try again.