[EM] Fwd: Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul Elections

Sat Nov 12 11:15:51 PST 2011

Whatever our feelings or experience with FairVote per se, the fact remains
that there is no reason to give any credit to an "informal exit polling of
nearly 200 voters" if there is no semblance of methodology or raw results
published. Without more data, it's no better than "my taxi driver said".

Jameson

2011/11/12 Kathy Dopp <kathy.dopp at gmail.com>

> I would believe nothing whatsoever that comes from the mouth of the
> organization FairVote. Usually FairVote spokespersons espouse the
> opposite of the truth.  For instance, this is the same organization
> that continues to falsely claim that IRV solves the spoiler problem of
> a nonwinning candidate whose presence in the contest alters who would
> otherwise win - not; and falsely claims that IRV finds "majority
> winners" by misleadingly redefining the word "majority" to exclude all
> the voters whose ballots are exhausted by the final round; and falsely
> tells voters that IRV allows them to safely vote their true preference
> without worrying about causing their least favorite candidate to win,
> etc. and on and on.  Virtually nothing coming from the mouth of that
> organization is true.  Notice their informal poll could have
> characterized a 10% confusion rate as "almost uniform ease". Who
> knows.  I have learned to trust nothing coming from that misnomered
> organization.
>
> > From: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
> > To: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
> > Subject: [EM] Fwd: Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul
> >        Elections
> > Message-ID:
> >        <
> CAMyHmncQtXiDFcVoc--8UYW0Bqi_GMDCnS5iqBWaw6cqyvqGSQ at mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> >
> > it seems that voters in St Paul liked using IRV for city council
> elections.
> >
> > dlw
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: FairVote MN <info at fairvotemn.org>
> > Date: Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:30 PM
> > Subject: Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul Elections
> > To: "wetzelld at gmail.com" <wetzelld at gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > **
> >    [image: FairVote MN
> > eNews]<
> http://fairvotemn.org/sites/fairvotemn.org/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=45607&qid=347906
> >
> >
> > Nov. 9, 2011
> >
> > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
> >
> > *Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul Elections*
> >
> > *Voter outreach, clear ballot yield positive experience in wards where RV
> > is used*
> >
> > ST. PAUL ? One big winner in St. Paul?s city council elections Tuesday:
> > Ranked Choice Voting. Voting reform supporters across Minnesota are
> elated
> > that the new system?s rollout in St. Paul was the clear success we
> > anticipated, thanks to a comprehensive voter education campaign conducted
> > by FairVote MN and Ramsey County, a well-designed ballot and the system?s
> > inherent ease of use.
> >
> > ?The news today is that there is no news,? Joe Mansky, Ramsey County
> > election manager, told a Pioneer Press
> > reporter<http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_19292414>.
> > As Ward 3 election judge Robert Mooney said in the same article, the
> change
> > ?hasn?t been controversial or confusing.?
> >
> > In FairVote Minnesota?s informal exit polling of nearly 200 voters in
> wards
> > 1, 2 and 3, voters expressed almost uniform ease of use with the new
> system
> > and most desired to continue using it. ?It?s simple,? ?It?s
> > straightforward,? ?I like it ? if my first choice doesn?t make it, I
> have a
> > backup choice,? ?I heard little negativity,? and ?It?s high time this was
> > implemented!? were typical comments about the ranked ballot. Early
> reviews
> > of the ballots from the city show few spoiled ballots.
> >
> > In wards with competitive, multicandidate races ? where voters felt their
> > backup choices could make the difference ? voters overwhelmingly
> exercised
> > the option to rank candidates. In Ward 2?s close contest between
> incumbent
> > Dave Thune and challengers Jim Ivey and Bill Hosko, a full 72 percent of
> > voters cast a second-choice vote. Forty percent cast a third-choice vote,
> > 16 percent cast a fourth-choice vote and 10 percent cast a fifth-choice
> > vote.
> >
> > In Wards 1 and 2, where results were decisive in the first round of
> > counting and second choices didn?t come into play, most voters still used
> > their rankings: In Ward 1, 54 percent of voters marked a second choice
> and
> > 27 marked a third choice; in Ward 3, 62 percent marked a second choice
> and
> > 30 percent marked a third choice. This demonstrated that the more
> > competitive the race (i.e., the smaller the percentage of votes for the
> > winner or the top candidate in round 1), the more voters ranked.
> >
> > In Ward 2, the contest between Thune, Ivey and Hosko will be decided
> > Monday, when a manual count will be undertaken at Ramsey County Elections
> > Division (90 W. Plato Blvd, St. Paul). The count will begin at 8:30 am
> and
> > is open to the public.
> >
> > Ballots in that race will be counted in rounds, with the lowest
> > vote-getters eliminated and their votes redistributed to remaining
> > candidates until one has a majority ? or until two candidates remain, and
> > the one with the largest number of votes wins. Presently, Dave Thune
> leads
> > in round 1, 12 percentage points ahead of second-place finisher Ivey.
> Ivey
> > leads third-place finisher Hosko by just 57 votes.
> >
> > Ivey garnered the largest share (33 percent) of second-choice votes, with
> > Thune and Hosko receiving 25 percent and 23 percent respectively. Ballots
> > of the two eliminated candidates, Sharon Anderson and Cynthia Schanno,
> plus
> > write-in ballots, will be redistributed to Thune, Ivey and Hosko based on
> > those voters? second choices.
> >
> > Should Hosko advance, the winner will depend on the second choices on
> > Ivey's ballots (and potentially the third or additional choices on the
> > ballots of the already eliminated candidates). If Ivey advances, the
> winner
> > will depend on the second choices on Hosko's ballots (and potentially the
> > third or additional choices on the ballots of the already eliminated
> > candidates).
> >
> > Thune?s large initial lead will not be easily surpassed; however, either
> > Ivey?s or Hosko?s final totals could potentially exceed Thune?s in the
> > final round. Ivey?s large share of second-choice votes is an advantage
> > should he advance over Hosko.
> >
> > Voter turnout was roughly equivalent to general election turnout in past
> > council elections, there was an increase the number of voters this year
> in
> > Wards 2 and 3, where the races were most competitive. And, more
> > importantly, the move to RCV increased voter *participation* overall by
> > eliminating the costly, low-turnout primary and rolling two rounds into
> one
> > higher-turnout, more diverse general election. Essentially, more St.
> > Paulites had a hand in the ?winnowing? process and the final selection of
> > the winner. (In Portland, Maine, which just implemented RCV and had a
> > highly competitive citywide mayoral race, turnout exceeded expectations.)
> >
> > FairVote Minnesota congratulates yesterday?s winners and all candidates
> who
> > ran for the first time under RCV. The absence of confusion or difficulty,
> > the fact that voters in wards with competitive multicandidate races chose
> > to rank their choices, and the widespread positive feedback from voters
> in
> > those wards all attest to the transition?s success ? and the
> effectiveness
> > of the voter education campaign.
> >
> > While many of RCV?s benefits were already shown in Tuesday?s results,
> some
> > will materialize over time. But the triumph of voting reform in St. Paul
> is
> > cause for celebration, and we?re confident that more cities across
> > Minnesota will embrace RCV ? a political innovation that fosters
> > competition, increases voter participation, encourages positive
> campaigning
> > and eliminates worries about ?spoilers? and ?wasted votes? in municipal
> > elections.
> >
> > -n-
> >
> >
> >
> >  Click here to opt out of all e-mail
> > announcements<
> http://fairvotemn.org/index.php?q=civicrm/mailing/optout&reset=1&jid=636&qid=347906&h=4e14e2035b34612a
> >
> > FairVote MN Privacy
> > Policy<
> http://fairvotemn.org/sites/fairvotemn.org/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=45609&qid=347906
> >
> > PO Box 19440
> > Minneapolis, MN 55419-0440
> > United States
> > info at fairvotemn.org
> > (763) 807-2550
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111111/4631699e/attachment-0001.htm
> >
> >
>
> Kathy Dopp
> http://electionmathematics.org
> Town of Colonie, NY 12304
> "One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the
> discussion with true facts."
> "Renewable energy is homeland security."
>
> Fundamentals of Verifiable Elections
> http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174
>
> View some of my research on my SSRN Author page:
> http://ssrn.com/author=1451051
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111112/bdbb9145/attachment-0004.htm>