Oakland an example of risk in ranked-choice voting

`Ranked-choice voting is a failed experiment," according to Supervisor Mark Farrell. Today, Farrell and Supervisor Sean Elsbernd will propose a charter amendment to end ranked-choice voting in San Francisco. It will need a majority of votes from the Board of Supervisors to get on the ballot in June, but I can’t imagine any supervisor will be able to vote against it after the spectacle we are about to witness as we calculate the votes in this mayoral race.

It will only be rivaled by the dramatic scene across the Bay, where we are watching Oakland Mayor Jean Quan continue her "reign of error." (Read more)

Response: Thank you Joyce McCloy for sharing this. Curmilus Dancy II – The Political Agitator

See related:

Closer Look: Criticism Mounting Over Ranked Choice Voting

Instant Runoff Voting 

NCVote

N.Carolina’s Statewide Instant Runoff Voting Contest – the facts, the regrets

48 days after the election, instant runoff voting produced a "winner" for the NC Court of Appeals, for the  "Wynn"seat. Thanks to IRV, an experimental tallying method was used, the election was almost a tie, a recount was called for, and we had a plurality result, not a majority win.

After counting the IRV votes,  the highest vote getter lost his 100,000 vote lead, and the contest became so close that a recount was requested. The declared winner won with 28% of votes from all ballots cast on election day. We do not know how many 2nd and 3rd choice votes each candidate got, as this data was not released to the public. (Read more)

Note: Joyce what in the hell? So now they have the audacity to not publicize all the results from an election? So how can we trust these jokers? This is just sad. C. Dancy II – DCN Publisher

St. Paul preps for voting via ranked choice–Source:

St. Paul voters will have a lot to learn for the 2011 city elections, and officials still are trying to figure out how to teach them.

It’s the first year ranked-choice voting will be used to choose City Council members. The council is putting together an ordinance that spells out how it will work, and once that’s settled, there will be a campaign to inform voters about the change. (Read more)

Note: From the desk of Chris Telesca: Could this be why tax-exempt foundations support non-profits that advocate for IRV?: Ranked choice voting will work fine in local, non-partisan elections. However its advocates have a different plan in mind for legislative and statewide races: they want to eliminate the partisan primary.

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

Instant analysis–Source: News & Observer

After seven weeks, the votes are in, counted and recounted. The result: Doug McCullough won the Nov. 2 election – the Instant Runoff election – for a seat on the state Court of Appeals. McCullough should make a good judge on the Appeals Court (he’s been there before, serving capably). Question is, should North Carolina elect to use Instant Runoff Voting in statewide races again? (Read more)

Note: I totally agree 100%. This was instant “BULLMANURE” and everyone who pushed to do this election in that fashion is just that full of it. How in the hell can anyone feel good about this particular race? Nope I am not talking about because Judge Thigpen lead and then lost but because how do we know the total process was done correctly? Do we know if all the candidates received their right amount votes? Not a supporter of IRV now and never. C. Dancy II – DCN Publisher

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

After 48 days the instant runoff voting contest for NC Court of Appeals is over–Source: NC Voter

Just in time for Christmas. 48 days after the election, instant runoff voting produces a "winner" for the NC Court of Appeals contest for Wynn’s seat. Initially, Cressie Thigpen was leading by 100,000 votes but he only had 20% of the votes cast amongst the 13 candidates. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

Thigpen Concedes To McCullough In NC Court Of Appeals Judge Race–Source: WITN

Incumbent Judge Cressie Thigpen has conceded to Doug McCullough in their race for a seat on the North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Thigpen congratulated McCullough for the victory after a statewide recount completed Monday showed McCullough ahead by 6,655 votes out of nearly 1.1 million cast. McCullough had led by about 6,000 votes before the recount. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

Weak defense of IRV – Instant Runoff Voting in NC Court of Appeals oddities

Some say instant runoff voting did what it was supposed to do in the NC Court of Appeals Contest. For sure the IRV algorithm that sorts, allocates and eliminates votes is capricious in nature. IRV election is like a crap shoot. The top 2 candidates had 20% and 15% of first round votes. Thigpen led McCullough by 100,000 votes. After sorting, allocating, eliminating and reshuffling the IRV votes, McCullough and Thigpen had a near tie. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

N. Carolina’s instant runoff voting chickens come home to roost. Recount sought

The instant runoff voting contest for NC Court of Appeals is headed to a recount. Here we are, 38 days after the election, we get the results to the "instant runoff" and learn that we’re going in for another round, due to lack of confidence in the tallying procedures. No surprise, since Larry Leake, the Chair of the NC State Board of Elections expressed concern about the tallying procedures when approved on Oct 28, 2010 in the middle of the election. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

Note: IRV what a mess. But they wanted though. C. Dancy II DCN Publisher

Correcting counting error leads to new leader in Court of Appeals race–Source: WRAL

RALEIGH, N.C. — Nearly complete results from the instant runoff race for the North Carolina Court of Appeals show the second-place candidate overtaking the leading candidate from the first round of voting.

State elections director Gary Bartlett said Doug McCullough had a roughly 6,700-vote lead over incumbent Cressie Thigpen with counting complete in 99 of the 100 counties. The only one left – Warren County – doesn’t have enough votes cast to turn the race back to Thigpen, he said. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

Jeanne Massey: Give ranked voting more of a chance–Source: Star Tribune

One dull election proves nothing (though it was procedurally sound).

I’m struggling to discern the point of the Nov. 21 article "New voting is not as simple as 1-2-3."

Was it that ranked-choice voting (RCV) failed to revolutionize electoral politics in one under-the-radar election last year in Minneapolis? That’s not news — especially to those working hard to put Minnesota at the forefront of electoral reform. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

Instant runoff not so quick–Source: Rocky Mount Telegram

The Nash County Board of Elections will examine instant runoff voting results for the fifth and final seat on the N.C. Court of Appeals.

The county’s elections board and staff will meet at 10 a.m. Monday inside the auditorium of the Nash County Agriculture Center to count tallies for Court of Appeals Judge candidates Cressie Thigpen and Doug McCullough. They are the two leading vote-getters in this year’s judicial race, which had 11 other candidates. (Read more)

See related:

Instant Run Off Voting

For Polk County Democrat website, Ignorance is bliss – about instant runoff voting–Source: Protect North Carolina Elections – Stop Instant Runoff Voting

Ignorance is bliss if you read what website owner of Polkdemocrats writes. They don’t know or care how the statewide IRV contest will be tallied, in fact they don’t even know that we have top 2 IRV and NOT San Francisco style IRV. Polk Dem’s webmaster says no one cares about this contest so its ok if voters are confused, spoil their ballots, or that results will be hinky. They aren’t worried about the non transparent tallying process, either. Guess it’s be . . .  (Read more)

Note: Once again thank you Joyce McCloy for staying on top of the voter process. Yep, I can believe the ignance because many have no clue about what is happening with IRV and the sad part they don’t seek to find out what is really happening. There should have been more education from the state party about what was about to take place with the IRV. And then again the local branches could have taken it upon themselves to learn and to educate their counties about the process. C. Dancy II – DCN Publisher and an Edgecombe County Democratic Party Precinct Chair

See related:

Democratic Party Issues In Edgecombe County

Instant Run Off Voting

Oakland CA voters confused by instant runoff voting on Nov 2 – video

OAKLAND — As Oaklanders cast their ballots today, one of the hottest subjects is not the issues and the candidates, but the method of voting, a new ranked-choice system used in the mayoral race.
…
Diana Toutjian, 57, a native Oaklander who attended Piedmont Avenue as a kindergartner, was baffled by the system. She didn’t understand how it worked, and voted three times for the same candidate. This means her second and third votes won’t count. "They should have had a red box there to explain what we were supposed to do," Toutjian said… (Read more)

NC GOP attorneys demand corrective action on problems with touch-screen voting–Source: Examiner

A total of 65 counties in North Carolina use paper ballots tabulated by optical scanners, universally considered to be highly accurate and efficient.

Thursday morning attorneys representing the NC Republican Party delivered a letter to the State Board of Elections demanding corrective action be taken immediately in the cases of voting problems with touch-screen voting equipment. (Read more)

See related:

IRV – Instant Runoff Voting and the NC Court of Appeals (Judges) Election 2010

IRV – Instant Runoff Voting

Board of Elections decides how to count instant runoff votes–Source: News 14

RALEIGH – The North Carolina Board of Elections has decided how to handle counting the returns for an instant runoff election.

Thirteen people are running for the Court of Appeals. Voters must choose three candidates and rank them in order of preference.

If no one gets over 50 percent of the "first choice" candidates, the top two "first choice" vote-getters advance.

Ballots picking those two candidates as their first choice are set aside. Then, elections workers look at the second and third choices of the rest of the voters and apply those votes to the runoff candidates. (Read more)

See related:

IRV – Instant Runoff Voting and the NC Court of Appeals (Judges) Election 2010

IRV – Instant Runoff Voting