Yes, although without a runoff, the GOP would have held a primary before the Warnock race.https://twitter.com/RobGeorge/status/1346637811290664960 …
-
-
I don't get this at all. A system like this in the primaries would have saved the GOP from Trump to begin with. Seems like these are more likely to represent the actual will of voters. And selfishly, special elections tend to favor Republicans.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Your mouth to God's ears.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
California likes them because they make it far less likely that the already unlikely prospect of a Republican getting elected happens.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thoughts on ranked choice ballots?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What about an instant runoff? That will reduce the ability of third parties to "steal" (for lack of a better word) votes from a similar candidate.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why do they even do this? It seems obviously a bad idea, for either party, really. Except perhaps under single party rule, like in California?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Jungle primaries would be more tolerable to me with ranked choice voting. First across the wire jungle primaries are useless.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.