Colorado Proposition 131, the Top-Four Primary and Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative, is on the ballot in Colorado as an initiated state statute on November 5, 2024.
A "yes" vote supports establishing top-four primary elections and ranked-choice voting for U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, governor, attorney general, secretary of state, treasurer, Colorado University board of regents, state board of education, and state legislature.
A "no" vote opposes this initiative, thereby maintaining semi-closed primaries and plurality vote single-winner general elections for U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, governor, attorney general, secretary of state, treasurer, Colorado University board of regents, state board of education, and state legislature.
I cancelled your vote by voting no.Colorado Proposition 131, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politicsballotpedia.org
I don't know if this will pass or not. I voted for it. IMO, open primaries and ranked voting is the way to go.
Yes, Oligarchs wouldn't like it.I cancelled your vote by voting no.
I cancelled your vote by voting no.
Me too.Colorado Proposition 131, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politicsballotpedia.org
I don't know if this will pass or not. I voted for it. IMO, open primaries and ranked voting is the way to go.
If I lived in Colorado I would definitely vote for this. Out of all my political opinions, supporting ranked choice voting might be the one I’m most sure of.Colorado Proposition 131, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politicsballotpedia.org
I don't know if this will pass or not. I voted for it. IMO, open primaries and ranked voting is the way to go.
???Yes, Oligarchs wouldn't like it.
Why? What are the negatives you see from this initiative?I cancelled your vote by voting no.
???
Oligarchs?
Dude...we are talking about Colorado. Not NYC.
We're taking about the Main Party trying to maintain control. Oligarchs don't like ranked voting. Thanks for showing who you really are.???
Oligarchs?
Dude...we are talking about Colorado. Not NYC.
Why? What are the negatives you see from this initiative?
Here's a downside: With RCV and open primaries, political parties are irrelevant.If I lived in Colorado I would definitely vote for this. Out of all my political opinions, supporting ranked choice voting might be the one I’m most sure of.
It completely eliminates the dilemma of having to choose between the candidate you most support and the lessor of two evils that actually have a chance to win. It doesn’t require holding a costly second election like with a traditional runoff. I have never been able to find any real downsides.
They aren’t irrelevant. The organization, structure, and elections apparatuses of political parties are still going to matter.Here's a downside: With RCV and open primaries, political parties are irrelevant.
Here's a downside: With RCV and open primaries, political parties are irrelevant.
We're taking about the Main Party trying to maintain control. Oligarchs don't like ranked voting. Thanks for showing who you really are.
Here's a downside: With RCV and open primaries, political parties are irrelevant.
When anybody, no matter what party they belong to...or even if they don't belong to a party...can vote in any party's primary, then that party's actual members lose control over their party. That party becomes irrelevant.They aren’t irrelevant. The organization, structure, and elections apparatuses of political parties are still going to matter.
But even if it were the case that they were irrelevant, why is that a negative?
Yes.That's a DOWNSIDE?!?!
Yes.
Have the parties become irrelevant in the 19 states that have open primaries?When anybody, no matter what party they belong to...or even if they don't belong to a party...can vote in any party's primary, then that party's actual members lose control over their party. That party becomes irrelevant.
That doesn’t really seem like a problem to me.4-way ranked choice is not immune from problems. It's possible for the candidate who has the most 1st choices to not win. It's even mathematically possible that the candidate with the second-most or even third-most 1st choices ends up winning.
To the plurality who gave the most 1st choices to a candidate only to see him or her not win, this can look unfair, especially if they really don't like any of the other candidates.
IMO, it's most useful in primary elections -- harder for extremists to win major party nominations simply by getting 20-35% of the vote.It's not going to immediately lead to a third party having a chance at presidential elections, but it absolutely is a good step towards third parties strengthening at the state level, possibly to the point where real challenges for the presidency can happen.
Colorado Proposition 131, Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative (2024)
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politicsballotpedia.org
I don't know if this will pass or not. I voted for it. IMO, open primaries and ranked voting is the way to go.
Haley sure tried to make that so during the Republican primaries.Have the parties become irrelevant in the 19 states that have open primaries?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?