• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I read the article, and it doesn’t change the argument. Undervoting is a problem, but one that doesn’t affect ranked choice voting any more than fptp. Voters were able to select two candidates and only voted for one, and probably don’t even realize they did not complete their ballot. If anything, a little ballot education outreach that would be necesaary while implementing ranked choice might reduce undervoting overall.

    • LittleLordLimerick@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Voters were able to select two candidates and only voted for one

      Clarification: low-income voters from predominantly black areas did this, which is effectively disenfranchisement. That’s the concern: that low-income minorities may be disenfranchised by more complex/confusing ballots. The concern is real because it already happened.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, low income correlates with low education and an increase in voter error. That’s not a reason to not make the elections more fair or more accurate. It’s the opposite of that.

        Ranked Choice voters can still select their first and only choice. If there are two spots, there will be two sections to fill out rankings and it will likely result in fewer undervotes.