#and they STILL try to appeal to those people as a lesser version of Trump omfg | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

harusha · 5 years ago

Note

What are your top pokemon games??

Official or fangame? I’ll just list both. I will say Pokemon Reborn is my top-rated overall if we combine both lists (with HGSS and Collesseum/XD following as 2 and 3 respectively.)

On Official, it’s

1. Heartgold/Soulsilver (My favorite region is Johto, and Ethan is my favorite Pokemon protagonist so…unsurprising. The games are still genuinely good though imo because of the massive amount of content and post-game and QoL stuff like following Pokemon, auto-run, etc.) I also love the nostalgic feeling of the region. Lance is also here, and I like him and his design a lot, not as much as Volkner though. Also Proton is here, and I love the dude so. Pedometer is included here.

2. Pokemon Colosseum/Pokemon XD; I include this together since they’re a duo set in terms of story. XD is the better one gameplay-wise because of the new additions of Shadow moves, more Pokemon choices, QoL changes like saving, etc. but Colosseum is the harder of the two games imo b/c of the sparsity of Pokemon–if you can play it on laptop, mod XD with Pokemon XG for massive QoL changes (Fairy Type, more shadow Pokemon, upped difficulty, etc.)

I like how this set tries new stuff and it honestly showcases how if you the Pokemon IP to a third-party, you end up with something that tries to be different and actually plays pretty well.

3. Pokemon BWBW2; included as a set because of joint story line. Honestly, I feel like BWBW2 are objectively the last great mainline series additions. Even if you didn’t care for the story, they at least tried with it and the rivals. You had the nice rival in Bianca and the “focused/ruder” rival in Cheren, and both encompassed the themes of the game (Truth with Bianca as she realizes her ineptness as a trainer and Ideals with Cheren who strives to overcome his boundaries and the player even if he never can). N is pretty awesome, and I think Ghetsis is a better Lusamine (sorry, idc for how Lusamine’s actions are brushed over and blamed on the space jellyfish). There’s a lot to enjoy in Unova imo.

Also massive post-game stuff like Join Avenue (which encourages one of the main tenets of Pokemon, interacting with others and trading; ex. “Magnemite Coil”), half the region opening up for Post-game (White Treehollow, Kyurem’s abode, etc.). The Legendaries also have home locations for the most part, and their items aren’t just given to you by random people. A lot of stuff to do that isn’t just breeding mindlessly for shinies (I mean I love doing that, but options ya know?) or online battle.

4. Pokemon Conquest; Fire Emblem (or more accurately, Nobunaga’s ambition) meets Pokemon. I like turn-based grid tactic games, and this one’s actually pretty fun. You’re encouraged to roam around and give people different Pokemon to see which ones they’re compatible with. Also another example of what can be done if Pokemon is given to a another developer.

5. Pokemon Explores of Sky (and to a lesser extent since it’s the base, Time/Darkness); you can swap this with Colloseum/XD, BWBW2 or Pokemon Conquest depending on if you prefer Pokemon’s style of play, tactics games, or dungeon crawlers. I like this one since the story’s actually pretty good, the difficulty’s nice, and especially the post-game dungeons and content.

6. Pokemon Platinum and Diamond+Pearl to a lesser extent– the region that actually has a reasonably difficult Elite Four and champion. I love the additions they have like distortion world, the melancholic feel you get at times in the Chateau area and snowfields, and the post-game Battle Frontier. However, the games run so slow without Drayano’s mods. In terms of husbandos, Volkner’s pretty nice as well, and he’s pretty high-tier for me. Cynthia’s here as well, so I guess she counts since she’s a feature every time she shows up.

7. Pokemon FRLG-The definite version of Kanto for me. Sevii Islands, callbacks (callforwards?) to the Johto games with the Rocket Admins, decent difficulty and ability to sequence break somewhat, etc. It gives new experiences for those who’ve played the OG versions, but doesn’t change them drastically. The “you can’t evolve anything outside of the OG 151 before post-game” is stupid though. Lance is here as well, but his half Dragonite/Dragonair team annoys me b/c of how repetitive it is, but product of the time as well and the HGSS first battle had that as well but at least they’re all evolved.

8. Pokemon Red/Blue Rescue Team-I like this one since the story’s still good and incorporates the idea of a human being transported to a Pokemon world, but I just feel like Sky’s gameplay improvements and portraits for everyone trumps this one. I like Gengar a lot and his team. I also think the difficulty on this one (depending on starter and partner) is fairly good at times (The Moltres fight is actually pretty difficult if you don’t have Pikachu or a water type partner).

9. Pokemon Emerald and to a lesser extent Ruby/Sapphire–Battle Frontier, Scott and Smeargle cave (ie. post-game content), beautiful promotional artwork (including ORAS’s), fairly difficult battles at time if you aren’t prepared/going in blind with no excessive grinding (2nd May battle, Flannery, etc.), hidden secrets like Regis and Secret Bases. However, the latter half is so boring with the excessive surfing and lackluster variety. Steven’s here, and he’s a dreamboat even with the sprite graphics.

10. Pokemon Channel and Hey you, Pikachu!-Weird I know. This would be higher if I didn’t think this was a niche pick. It’s just really relaxing, and I want another one, especially if you can get more Pokemon to raise. It’s a lot more fun once you play it. I like exploring with Pikachu and it offers a look into the world of Pokemon as a non-trainer. I really want another one tbh.

11. Pokemon Rangers series (Ranked from favorite to lowest; Shadows of Almia–>OG–>Guardian Signs; all are good but that’s my preference) The gameplay is actually pretty fun, and I wish we got another one. They could use Joycons as a styler. Spencer, Sven, and Lunick are also pretty cute

12. Pokken Tournament- What battles should feel like in mainline if they injected millions of dollars into the mainline, so unrealistic expectation. I think Pokken is a decent fighting game. The moves are nice, and the music is good. This can go lower if you don’t care for fighting games.

13. Pokemon Battle Revolution and Stadium games-They’re mostly battle simulators with some mini-games. The animations are actually pretty lively and fun compared to SWSH’s. I would like to rank this higher, but there is no story mode sadly. It’s great if you want to see what Pokemon would look like in-scale.

14. Pokemon X/Y-I think these are actually pretty nice if only for the fact there isn’t excessive handholding; it’s there but it doesn’t force me to put down the game out of boredom. The outfits are genuinely pretty cute. However, the rivals are ridiculously terrible, difficulty is either too low or unbalanced if you use/turn off exp. share. Let’s put ORAS here as well b/c I think the lack of Battle Frontier and mediocre post-game, getting Lati@s early, etc. drops it down from Emerald. The PSS system is amazing though.

15. Pokemon Trozei and Pokemon Pinball series-Yeah, I’ve played these. Trozei’s actually pretty cool as a match-3 game, and pinball is pinball. You also get slightly more lore into the Pokemon world with Lucy Fleetfoot. I like match-3 and pinball so very much a YMMV. Pop Gates to Infinity and Super Mystery Dungeon here as well. Idk, they just lack the magic of the first two entries.

16. Pokemon Snap, Pokemon Dash, all the other spin-offs I didn’t talk about-they all offer something fun, but I just wish it was either updated for modern times and not released again (like with Snap) or a bit more (in the case of Detective Pikachu and Pokepark series). Pop Puzzle League games here as well. I like them, but they aren’t much besides Tetris games. Same goes for the Pokemon Trading Card games; they’re nice, but not super great imo.

???. Pokemon Box/Ranch/all the other storage games and stuff like Dream Radar-Idk what you’d want me to say since they’re storage space or gimmick games to catch HA Pokemon. You do get Extremespeed Zigzagoon which I love since the little buggers are very adorable.

Bottom Tier. Pokemon SM and USUM. I hate these games. They’re cash grabs (more so than usual) with being $40 a piece and the updated versions being barely changed (and actually feeling like what should have been released first). Incredibly handholding, areas feel half-baked, lacks areas to explore for the most part, Lillie is kinda annoying for me tbh (which hurts because you’re supposed to feel for her and the game’s story hinges on that), and the player is an actual detriment to what they’re trying to achieve story-wise. A big shame b/c Alola is a pretty region and Team Skull is great in concept, but execution is awful. Stated as someone who has bought all 4 versions to keep, and 2 extras for gifting.

Absolute Bottom Tier- Pokemon Masters, incredibly terrible mobage game coming from someone who plays FGO, FEH, etc. lack of meaningful content, grinding but meaningless b/c of said lack of content (ex. FGO gates you with mats but it makes you feel like you’re growing with your servants and offers a story and events to compensate; basically, a sense of achievement). CO-OP is pretty bad when you can just hop over to GBF or something if you want guilds and group content. I’m still gonna wait for Ethan and Volkner to appear though.

Unrated-OG RBGY and OG GSC (the remakes are superior outside of nostalgia factor imo so I think it’d be unfair for them to take a spot), LGPE (didn’t buy them b/c pricing but the colors are vibrant and I love that), SWSH (didn’t buy them because I have opinions on the cuts and stuff and price point doesn’t look appealing for what’s offered), Pokemon Mini (these were included with Pokemon Channel), Magikarp Jump+Duel (Duel was a cash grab and Magikarp Jump is cute but no real opinion on it), Pokemon Go (weird spot where I like it, but I don’t live in an area with safe walking areas so very much area-dependent), Arcade games (I don’t live in Japan for that), Perdue Farm games (they’re flash games made to promote so…), Pokemon Rumble (enjoyable but not memorable for me imo) etc.

Fangames-

1. Pokemon Reborn-150+ hours of content, visible themes that permeate the story and characters, beautiful spritework for some of the areas, intuitive usage of TMs/HMs and some logic (ex. Field Effects that emulate anime battling in turn-based rpg such as Corrosive Field; using Rock Smash to break the glass in some areas to solve puzzles, etc.), actual difficulty that hinges on how much you understand Pokemon (ex. IVs, stats, EVs, etc.) that’s fair but still difficult, puzzles and rewards for exploring and coming back to areas, etc. Fantastic game that I wish Gamefreak had attempted to emulate (perhaps not the darker themes but the ambition basically). Has some kinks with the revolving door of characters and such but still fantastic. Also offers custom shiny sprites, custom egg sprites, and online play like Wonder Trade and battling.

2. Pokemon Rocket Edition-Not done but I think this is a fantastic hack so far story-wise and how it implements its mechanics. You’re a Rocket Grunt, but you aren’t OP. It deals with the politics behind Kanto and Team Rocket. Still being worked on.

3. Pokemon Viridian Version-Another “play as a Rocket” game. Funny yet still can be serious; it takes the tone of the anime and understands when to be serious and when to not be. It feels like it would fit into the canon tone-wise, and deconstructs the “it’s cool to be a Rocket!” thing.

4. Pokemon Gaia-Excellent and a huge callback to classic Pokemon in story. It’s an OG region and offers a lot to do.

5. Drayano hacks- QoL updates but his work actually adds a lot to the games+new events.

Anyways, that’s my list. There’s a lot of Pokemon content, but this is how I feel for the most part.

#long post #i will say Piers is high tier husbando though

7 notes · View notes

sosayset · 4 years ago

Text

My Little June 6th Social Media Exchange

I’ve got a friend, a former teammate on a hockey team, who is fairly right leaning. I made a post on June 6th, the anniversary of the storming the beaches of Normandy, about my feelings on the Republican Party and their current state of true awfulness. He didn’t respond directly, but definitely threw down on his own so that I could see it. So I responded to him. Harshly. And this isn’t an exchange. I called him out, didn’t do anything other than to acknowledge there was a response that I ignored, actually multiple because I’m sure that I was mentioned by more than one other mouth breather, and then I doubled down. And now, because I am still mad, I’m making it public to my audiences.

My response to his shameless defense of the Republican Party and conservatism in general.

<My Dude>, on your side of the political divide there are unabashed racists. On your side, there are actual Klansmen. On your side there are actual, literal Nazis; we're talking "wir müssen die Juden ausrotten," Nazis. This isn't up for debate, either, this is absolute FACT. Now, and this is important, this isn't me being accusatory, but me pointing out the bare bones of the issue. These horrible people agree with you and your point of view. They are comfortable with you and your point of view. They *identify* with you and your point of view. They are comfortable with you and standing alongside you and supporting you and your perspective and your political point of view and everything you espouse. Actual f***ing Nazis are there with you, shoulder to shoulder. And this is an undeniable reality of irrefutable empirical evidence.

And all of this begs the question of pretty much anyone who might find themselves in a similar position, in a space where the most contemptible, most reviled, most deplorable, people can find comfort and sanctuary; "what does this reflection say about my values and what I believe?" If actual Nazis are on your side, and your first reaction is NOT to take a step back and ask yourself why they are comfortable on your side and not afraid to be beaten within inches of their life, you are in the WRONG. "Why are Nazis comfortable with me and being in my space?" The answer is, "I'm wrong about something, I need to figure out why and shut the hell up until I know exactly why." That's it.

Me? I'm pretty much okay punching them in the face, no questions asked, and leaving them on the ground bleeding. But that's me, and how I feel with the idea of actual Nazis being on my side...on June 6th...in the US of A. I am not a conservative or 2021 Republican so I don't have to make those decisions.

<My Dude>, take a moment. Take your step back. Take a look at things from the outsider perspective on things, both as they are and through the lens of history you keep saying you have. And then please reevaluate yourself. From where I see things, you are in the bunkers on that beach aiming your weapons at those landing vehicles, repeating to your brothers in arms how right those Austrian and Italian f***s in charge of their nations were and that it was and is worth killing and worth dying for to grow their ideologies, and standing in staunch opposition to those storming that beach in defense of democracy. You ARE on the side of Nazis now, how can you possibly believe or defend the idea that your would not have been 70 years ago?

Personally, I believe you are better than that, given a more lucid frame of reference then where you actually stand, as it is. But for now, it is what it is. It can't be stated more plainly; it is 2021 and you ARE on the side with the Nazis and you would have been 70 years ago, too.

As I said, there was a response. Maybe more than one. I ignored them. I posted this article (the transcript I used, and sources, are all below)

If you've read through this <article> and the source material, or at least given some of them a brief look, you'll know that the consensus definition of fascism in the sources says it hasn't *actually* existed after 1945, and I am inclined to agree. At most it has morphed into lesser versions espousing *similar* ideological tendencies. And that's my point in all of this. We've taken minuscule baby steps away from blatant racism as a foundation, but the idea that there are some who belong, and some who don't, while defined less clearly than the past, still exists, and that mentality still serves as a primary motivator for specific beliefs and even prejudices.

That said, <my Dude>, I read all of things you post that the algorithms of this site allow me to see regularly, and I can tell you, that through the scope of that version of neo-fascism outright predicated not on race but on the sense of some belonging, and some not, is reflected in all of your rhetoric CONSTANTLY. All the time. And maybe you believe it, or maybe you don't, that's not for me to say. But the fact remains that, as I said before, you are a vocal supporter on the side that has Nazis. You are on the side that this article basically breaks down as pro-fascist in its core beliefs.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by saying you're actually NOT of that mindset, but to look at just where you're sitting. The Germans have a saying that goes something like, "if you see a Nazi sitting at a table, and ten other people sitting with him, you see a table of 11 Nazis."

And my overall point remains unchanged; recognize the table you are sitting at, right now.

PS- I didn't bother to read yours, or anyone else's responses. You're sitting at a metaphoric table with those most ideologically aligned currently with 1930s and 40s fascism, along with modern Nazis, and I am calling it out, that's all. Any response, it either agrees and like me, are asking you to reevaluate, or they are trying to defend sitting at that table without such a reexamination, which isn't worth my time

Be well.

____

What Is Fascism?

Since before Donald Trump took office, historians have debated whether he is a fascist (1.).

As a teacher of World War II history (2.) who has written about fascism (3.), I’ve found that historians have a consensus (4.) definition of the term, broadly speaking.

Given the term’s current – and sometimes erroneous – use, I think it’s important to distinguish what fascism is and is not.

+Race-first thinking+ Fascism, now a century old, got its start with Benito Mussolini and his Italian allies. They named their movement after an ancient Roman emblem, the fasces (5.), an ax whose handle has been tightly reinforced with many rods, symbolizing the power of unity around one leader.

Fascism means more than dictatorship, however.

It’s distinct from simple authoritarianism – an anti-democratic government by a strongman or small elite – and “Stalinism” (6.) – authoritarianism with a dominant bureaucracy and economic control, named after the former Soviet leader. The same goes for “anarchism,” (7.) the belief in a society organized without an overarching state.

Above all, fascists view nearly everything through the lens of race (8.). They’re committed not just to race supremacy, but maintaining what they called “racial hygiene,” (9.) meaning the purity of their race and the separation of what they view as lower ones.

That means (10.) they must define who is a member of their nation’s legitimate race. They must invent a “true” race.

Many are familiar with Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime’s so-called Aryan race (11.), which had no biological or historical reality. The Nazis had to forge a mythic past and legendary people. Including some in the “true race” means excluding others.

+Capitalism is good+ For fascists, capitalism is good. It appeals to their admiration of “the survival of the fittest,” a phrase coined by social Darwinist Herbert Spencer (11.), so long as companies serve the needs of the fascist leadership and the “Volk,” or people.

In exchange for protecting private property, fascists demand capitalists act as cronies (12.).

If, for example, a company is successfully producing weapons for foreign or domestic wars – good. But if a company is enriching nonloyal people, or making money for the imagined subrace, the fascists will step in and hand it to someone deemed loyal.

If the economy is poor, the fascist will divert attention from shortages to plans for patriotic glory or for vengeance against internal or external enemies.

+Might makes right+ Important to most fascists is the idea that the nation’s “patriots” (13.) have been let down, that “good people” are humiliated while “bad people” do better.

These grievances cannot be answered, fascists say, if things remain under the status quo. There needs to be revolutionary change allowing the “real people” to break free from the restraints of democracy or existing law and get even (14.).

For fascists, might makes right.

Since for them the law should be subservient to the needs of the people and the need to crush socialism or liberalism, fascists encourage party militias. These enforce the fascist will, break unions (15.), distort elections and intimidate or co-opt the police (16.).

The historical fascists of Germany and Mussolini’s Italy (17.) extended the might-makes-right principle to expansion abroad, though the British fascists of the 1930s, led by Oswald Mosley (18.) and his British Union of Fascists, preferred isolationism (19.) and preached a sort of internal war against an imagined Jewish enemy of the state. What fascists reject

First and foremost, fascists want to revolt against socialism (20.). That’s because it threatens the crony capitalism that fascists embrace.

Not only does socialism aim for equal prosperity no matter the race, but many socialists tend to envision the eventual extinction (21.) of separate nations, which offends the strong fascist belief in nation states.

Along with getting rid of aristocrats or other elites, fascists are prepared to displace the church or seek a mutually beneficial truce with it (22.).

Mussolini, Hitler and the Falangists in Spain (23.) learned that they had to live with (24.), not replace, the church in their countries – as long as their regimes weren’t broadly attacked from the pulpit.

Fascists also reject democracy, at least any democracy that could potentially result in socialism or too much liberalism (25.). In a democracy, voters can choose social welfare policies. They can level the playing field between classes and ethnicities, or seek gender equality.

Fascists oppose all of these efforts.

+Fascism grows from nationalism+ Fascism is the logical extreme of nationalism (26.), the roughly 250-year-old idea that nation states should be built around races or historical peoples.

The first fascists didn’t invent these ideas out of nothing – they just pushed nationalism further than anyone had before. For the fascist, it’s not just that a nation state makes “the people” sovereign. It’s that the will of righteous, real people – and its leader – comes before all other considerations, including facts.

Indeed, the will, the people, their leader and the facts are all one in fascism.

1. https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/164170 2. https://history.case.edu/faculty/john-broich/ 3. https://www.abramsbooks.com/product/blood-oil-and-the-axis_9781468314014/ 4. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-twentiethcentury-political-thought/fascism-and-racism/CFB19146B5E63D20089DF0AAC5CD84D9 5. https://www.britannica.com/topic/fasces 6. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Stalinism 7. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anarchism/ 8. https://books.google.com/books?id=NLiFIEdI1V4C&q=%22racial+thought+for+political+purposes%22#v=snippet&q=%22racial%20thought%20for%20political%20purposes%22&f=false 9. https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1093/embo-reports/kve217 10. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/review-of-politics/article/abs/racethinking-before-racism/02AAE753AAD57BAFB03A2F003EF12538 11. https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-and-human-behavior/chapter-5/breeding-new-german-race 12. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/herbert-spencer-survival-of-the-fittest-180974756/ 13. https://www.jstor.org/stable/260578?seq=1 14. https://web.archive.org/web/20130930081524/http:/www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_blackshirt.html 15. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14058/14058-h/14058-h.htm 16. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/ss-and-police 17. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/01/mussolinis-racial-policies-in-east-africa-revealed-italian-fascists-ambitions-to-redesign-the-social-order.html 18. https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-49405924 19. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/1932729.pdf 20. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/128540/the-anatomy-of-fascism-by-robert-o-paxton/ 21. https://books.google.com/books?id=tH0jwbnj7BgC&q=%22withering+away+of+the+state%22#v=snippet&q=%22withering%20away%20of%20the%20state%22&f=false 22. https://www.npr.org/2014/01/27/265794658/pope-and-mussolini-tells-the-secret-history-of-fascism-and-the-church 23. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/02/spains-civil-war-produced-a-fascist-movement-that-was-disorganized-but-just-as-authoritarian-as-italys.html 24. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-german-churches-and-the-nazi-state 25. https://theconversation.com/what-or-who-is-antifa-140147 26. https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism/Extreme-nationalism

0 notes

mastcomm · 5 years ago

Text

Why Ranked-Choice Voting Is Having a Moment

Presidential election years always raise big questions about the way we vote, in part because the process can get kind of messy.

Caucuses in particular have been derided as old-fashioned, opaque or inaccessible. Their critics got a significant boost last week, when Iowa’s caucus was plagued by technological and human mistakes, delaying results and plunging the first official voting of the 2020 campaign into chaos.

But even before Iowa, a new idea was catching on for 2020: ranked-choice voting. At least four states that have relied on caucuses to choose their Democratic presidential nominees — Alaska, Kansas, Hawaii and Wyoming — will use the method to select their delegates this year.

Ranked choice changes the very act of voting by allowing people to shift their support from losing candidates to more viable options as the field narrows, essentially doing on paper what caucusgoers have typically done in person. Versions of it had two high-profile real-world examples this weekend: the Irish election, and the best picture at the Academy Awards.

It has a complicated history and comes in many forms, but ranked-choice voting has been gaining converts across the United States in recent years. Several cities now use it in municipal elections. Maine uses it for some state and federal elections, though many Republicans there wish it weren’t so. And the presidential hopefuls Andrew Yang, Michael Bennet, Bill Weld and Elizabeth Warren have warmed to the idea.

How does it work?

On a ranked-choice ballot, voters can rank the candidates they like rather than choosing only one. The process varies; a ranked-choice presidential primary and a ranked-choice mayoral election would be structured differently.

But here’s a simple version: In a single-winner election, if no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the last-place candidate is eliminated and those who marked that candidate as No. 1 get their second choice counted instead.

That can go on for several rounds until a candidate emerges with a majority.

With ranked choice, voters can support outsider candidates without worrying about wasting their ballots. And candidates can win only with support — or at least tolerance — from a majority of the electorate, which can help prevent polarization.

That’s in contrast to the plurality or “first past the post” elections that are typical in the United States, in which candidates can win even if most voters oppose them, as long as the opposition is fractured.

Where did this idea come from?

Ranked-choice voting has lately gained a reputation as a new, progressive reform. But its history is long.

The multiseat version, in which candidates are elected to fill multiple open seats, was promoted by the philosopher John Stuart Mill in 1861. A single-winner version was developed about a decade later by William Ware, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

There was a wave of interest in ranked-choice voting in the United States about a century ago, helped along by the contentious 1912 presidential election, when Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft essentially split the Republican vote, and Woodrow Wilson, the Democrat, won.

That helped strengthen the case for electoral reform, and an array of cities, including Ashtabula, Ohio; Kalamazoo, Mich.; and New York City, experimented with forms of ranked-choice voting.

The practice fell out of favor in many places once it was no longer useful to those in power. But now several cities, including San Francisco; Cambridge, Mass.; St. Paul, Minn.; and Santa Fe, N.M., use ranked-choice voting. Even New York City joined that bandwagon (again) in a ballot referendum in November.

Jack Santucci, an assistant teaching professor of politics at Drexel University, said that ranked-choice voting starts to look attractive when an electorate is confronted with the right mix of polarization and fragmentation — for example, when a party or candidate maintains control with support from only a plurality of voters, while opposition groups are fractured.

Something like that appears to be unfolding now in the United States, where President Trump’s base of support is strong but not especially broad, and where Democrats are grappling with some internal division.

Versions of ranked-choice voting are also used in national elections in Malta, Ireland, Papua New Guinea and Australia.

Ranked choice can make politics a little more stable and even “a bit boring,” said Ben Reilly, a professor of social sciences at the University of Western Australia. “Even in an electorate where there is a wide diversity of viewpoints, the winner will be a candidate who can hit that middle ground.”

What are the arguments for and against?

Proponents of ranked choice say it can make campaigning less divisive. Ranked-choice elections sometimes beget campaign videos like this or this, in which smiling opponents stand side by side and encourage people to vote for both of them.

Candidates are more civil when they have an incentive to appeal to voters as a second or third choice, said David O’Brien, a staff lawyer with FairVote, an organization that promotes ranked-choice voting.

“Coming out of a primary, you end up having a nominee who has more support, and the primary itself probably hasn’t been as vicious and bitter as you might have seen otherwise,” he said.

FairVote also says ranked-choice voting can increase turnout, open up the political playing field and mitigate the power of money in politics.

Vicki Hiatt, the chairwoman of the Kansas Democratic Party, said she expected higher turnout in this year’s presidential primary in the state. She added that people were happy they would be able to cast their ballot without strategizing about electability.

“Sometimes they’re voting for the lesser of two evils,” she said. “So most people have said to me: ��This is great. Now I can vote for who I really want.’”

Critics of ranked choice say it can upend electoral politics in unpredictable ways, cost money or dampen turnout. And in some states and cities where ranked choice has come up for a vote, opponents argued that the cause was supported by dark money or other outside funding.

In 2018, Paul LePage, a Republican governor of Maine who had won two terms in office without a majority, called ranked-choice voting “the most horrific thing in the world” and questioned its constitutionality. Republicans in Maine are still fighting it today.

And in New York in November, members of the N.A.A.C.P. and the City Council’s Black, Latino and Asian Caucus spoke out against ranked-choice voting. They were partly worried that it could hurt candidates of color, and that a more complicated ballot could reduce turnout.

“It’s not just this fluff about your first choice, your second choice and your third choice, like you’re playing hopscotch,” said Adrienne Adams, a Democrat who represents portions of southeast Queens. “This is so much more intricate than that.”

She added that ranked ballots could introduce opportunities for candidates to game the system. “Ranked-choice voting just has the potential to erode that voting power that we’ve worked so hard for,” she said.

Jason McDaniel, an associate professor of political science at San Francisco State University, said that while ranked-choice voting might have intuitive appeal to people who favor reform, it was not a panacea.

“The Democratic Party position now is that we need to remove barriers to voting, and I think ranked-choice voting is counter to that,” he said. “My research shows that when you make things more complicated, which this does, there’s going be lower turnout.”

How does ranked-choice voting affect results?

Researchers are still trying to figure out whether it is easier for political outsiders to win under ranked choice, and what that might mean for diversity in political representation.

Dr. McDaniel said that because ranked-choice voting “usually advantages people who are incumbents or well known, or who have a lot of campaign funds,” there was no guarantee that it would shake up the status quo, or that candidates from racial or political minority groups would benefit.

There are also concerns about whether the system could enable new forms of foul play. Dr. Santucci said it was possible that in the single-seat version of ranked-choice voting, a lone candidate of color could be edged out of a race by opponents who conspire to do so. He and Dr. Reilly have also argued that multiseat ranked-choice voting could be implemented in ways that are poorly conceived and deeply unfair.

But some research suggests that ranked-choice elections might promote diversity among political representatives. One study in 2018 found that in the Bay Area in California, there were better outcomes for women and candidates of color under the system.

Sarah John, an author of that study and a researcher with the University of Virginia and the Sunlight Foundation, said ranked choice was still a fairly novel system in the United States.

“It will take some time for researchers to come to definitive answers about its effects,” she said. “Until then, the jury is still out, as it were, on whether ranked-choice voting will improve or hurt turnout and descriptive representation.”

from WordPress https://mastcomm.com/why-ranked-choice-voting-is-having-a-moment/

#Event

0 notes