The last round of ranked-choice ballots showed the left-wing candidate winning 56 percent of the votes, to Cuomo’s 44.

  • Liz@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    While RCV is better than the usual “choose one,” having to wait to find out the results is a big disadvantage. I wish more places would use Approval Voting.

  • Photuris@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    The DNC is gonna work hard to destroy ranked choice voting, aren’t they?

    • astutemural@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Already are.

      Tune in to this reposted Atlantic article learn that RCV is “wonkish and confusing”, that it has “warped the political calculus of the mayoral campaign” by causing candidates to (horror!) cross-endorse instead of dropping out or running attack ads. Clearly, the article concludes, if a newcomer can defeat a wealthy candidate with ‘name recognition’, the system must obviously be wrong.

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      If there were no ranked choice, he still would have won in this case. He won the plurality of the votes on the first round (unexpectedly and a massive over performance of the polls)

      Granted ranked choice may have made more people feel safer to consider him in the first place, but still worth noting here

      • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        He probably would have still won but you can’t make that determination directly

        Probably a lot of people voted for him as first because they could have another, more known option as option 2.

        Like in the National elections imagine that there was ranked choice. A third party would get a significant amount of votes, maybe even surpassing the democrats, but without this ranked choice, the inertia is just too high and it’s too risky to vote for them.

    • spinnetrouble@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 days ago

      They may not have to: there’s already a push to “denaturalize citizens,” and I’m pretty sure Mamdani is at or near the top of the list for that and subsequent deportation.

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      yes. ranked choice voting happened in alaska in 2020, and they tried but failed to repeal it in 2024.

      although alaska isnt by means a left leaning state, the establishment does not like ranked choice voting

    • Dr. Bluefall@toast.ooo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      In NYC at least, that would require repealing the amendment to the City Charter - a move that would be extremely unpopular, given that the ballot measure to amend the charter for ranked-choice primaries passed with >70% support (or over 500,000 votes).

  • MrSulu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is amazing and unfortunately triggering Trump and Team. Presidential threat to deport him already being worked on.

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    And now the mayoral primary that the party pulled out all the stops for is no big deal.

    So natually the nominee won’t have access to party funding.