Portland, Maine Voters Pass Charter Amendment for Mayoral Election Using Instant Runoff Voting

Last week, the voters of Portland, Maine, passed a charter revision to hold Mayoral elections, using Instant Runoff Voting.  The first such election will be in November 2011.  See this story.

The current system does not provide for a popular election for Mayor.  Instead, the voters choose members of the City Council, and the City Council chooses one of its own members to hold the office of Mayor.


Comments

Portland, Maine Voters Pass Charter Amendment for Mayoral Election Using Instant Runoff Voting — 8 Comments

  1. The EVIL IRV brainwashing continues — like a BAD monster movie in the 1950s.

    IRV = THE method to elect Hitler/Stalin clones (MONSTERS) when the Middle is divided.

    34 H–M–S
    33 S–M–H
    16 M–H–S
    16 M–S–H
    99

    A mere 99 votes for M in 1st plus 2nd place votes.

  2. We don’t have a problem in the United States with Hitler-like or Stalin-like people getting elected. We do have a problem with people getting elected who are motivated mostly by the desire to have prosperous, prestigious careers, instead of being motivated to improve public policy. IRV, as I have observed it, tends to elect people who are better than the people who are elected without IRV.

  3. # 3 Define *better*.

    Lots of extremist party hacks are nominated in the party hack primaries and then get elected in the party hack rigged gerrymander districts – some for decades and decades.

    How about looking at the Stalin and Hitler type rankings of the votes in the gerrymander Congress since 1929 ??? Now about ZERO folks in the middle. Wait until Jan. 2011 and see the left/right raving in the gerrymander Congress.

    Example U.S.A. Rep. John Dingell in S.E. Mich — robot party hack incumbent for 50 years plus in a Donkey safe seat gerrymander district.

    P.R. and App.V. = NO safe seat districts.

  4. IRV has been used for 100 years in Australia,where it has only served to maintain two-party domination. What’s behind the lavish (as opposed to the better alternatives) support for this bogus “reform”?

  5. #3 The mayor of Aspen, elected under IRV, favored its repeal; as did the Pierce County executive, who as auditor had been responsible for its implementation.

    Are these good persons or bad persons?

  6. #3 Say you like to drive a car and you need gasoline but you left your money ($100.) at home and you run out of gas one block from your home, and you’re trying to travel 100 miles.

    You have three choices;

    1) walk back home and get more money (multi-winner, the more per district the better, using STV).

    2) put the reserve quart of gasoline in the tank and continue driving to your desitination (IRV).

    3) stand out on the sidewalk and spare change (plurality voting).

    Looks like YOU choose #2…
    * * *

    Join the Frees,
    opposite gender #1!

    Go(t)Ogle?

    “Why did you THINK they called it Google?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.