You are NOT required to rank all 5 choices for the ballot to be valid! A single bubble filled in will be counted. The voter guide and voter instructions explicitly mention this in multiple places. What grandparent comment meant was that if more progressive voters who only ranked 1 candidate had also ranked Kathryn Garcia in any position 2-through-5 (and ranked Adams below or not at all), then maybe Garcia would have won. Voters who only rank 1 candidate are missing out on the full power of their ranked choice vote if their 1st-and-only candidate is eliminated early.
You can rank up to 5 for a valid ballot, so you can pick anywhere between 0-5 candidates. What the person who you originally commented to was saying was that in the 2021 election, many people voted as if this is first pass the post, and only ranked a single candidate with no backups. When that candidate didn’t get a majority, there were no choices for 2-5, and that’s how Adams got the votes.
Not sure how I implied that, but it was not my intention. To reiterate, you can rank anywhere between 0-5 candidates. Considering that there are 11 candidates on the ballot, plus write in, you could rank 5 candidates easily without ranking Cuomo. There’s no need to vote for him at all.
Yeah, I don’t think it was intentional, I just wanted to clarify… I didn’t want people to think that their ballot wouldn’t be valid unless they ranked five, and thus potentially giving votes to candidates that they normally would not support just to “complete” the ballot.
You implied it by answering Corngood’s question “You have to rank 5 candidates?” with a link to a general RCV video. You misunderstood Corngood to not know what RCV is. However, within the context of this thread (“NYC elections”), some awareness of RCV is to be presumed. Indeed, Corngood mentions in another comment to have already used RCV before. To me it was clear Corngood was upset about the “have to rank 5”, not about “WTF is RCV”. By linking to a general video you are implying that this is how RCV works, that you HAVE to rank 5, otherwise it won’t count, which is false. That’s not what you meant, but this is how it appears to other readers who would not be aware of your original misunderstanding. Those of us who actually like RCV feel an obligation to step in and correct you, all of us at once, to pre-empt the hazard of somebody else believing in your (unintentional) implication and ending up with the wrong idea that “wow, RCV sucks! your ballot gets thrown out if you don’t fill in all 5 bubbles perfectly!”
I’ve just never personally voted using RCV on a ballot that requires you to rank that many candidates for a valid ballot. That seems unnecessary.
Several implementations of it in Australia are full preferential, and require ranking all candidates (and there’s a kind of hybrid optional implementation in the federal senate where there is a minimum but you can rank as many as you want). The NYC one is still optional preferential actually, which is in my view a bad system because people get tricked into “just voting 1” and their vote consequently has less power to influence the result.
You have to rank 5 candidates? What the hell is the reasoning behind that?
You are NOT required to rank all 5 choices for the ballot to be valid! A single bubble filled in will be counted. The voter guide and voter instructions explicitly mention this in multiple places. What grandparent comment meant was that if more progressive voters who only ranked 1 candidate had also ranked Kathryn Garcia in any position 2-through-5 (and ranked Adams below or not at all), then maybe Garcia would have won. Voters who only rank 1 candidate are missing out on the full power of their ranked choice vote if their 1st-and-only candidate is eliminated early.
The NYC mayoral race is Ranked Choice Voting.
Obligatory CGP Grey video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE
I’ve just never personally voted using RCV on a ballot that requires you to rank that many candidates for a valid ballot. That seems unnecessary.
You can rank up to 5 for a valid ballot, so you can pick anywhere between 0-5 candidates. What the person who you originally commented to was saying was that in the 2021 election, many people voted as if this is first pass the post, and only ranked a single candidate with no backups. When that candidate didn’t get a majority, there were no choices for 2-5, and that’s how Adams got the votes.
Yes, but people need to be aware that they do not need to rank five candidates. Which is what your comment heavily implied.
Ranking candidates you do not like, even if ranked last, still can count as a vote if it comes to it.
If you do not like Andrew Cuomo, do not rank him at all
Not sure how I implied that, but it was not my intention. To reiterate, you can rank anywhere between 0-5 candidates. Considering that there are 11 candidates on the ballot, plus write in, you could rank 5 candidates easily without ranking Cuomo. There’s no need to vote for him at all.
Yeah, I don’t think it was intentional, I just wanted to clarify… I didn’t want people to think that their ballot wouldn’t be valid unless they ranked five, and thus potentially giving votes to candidates that they normally would not support just to “complete” the ballot.
You implied it by answering Corngood’s question “You have to rank 5 candidates?” with a link to a general RCV video. You misunderstood Corngood to not know what RCV is. However, within the context of this thread (“NYC elections”), some awareness of RCV is to be presumed. Indeed, Corngood mentions in another comment to have already used RCV before. To me it was clear Corngood was upset about the “have to rank 5”, not about “WTF is RCV”. By linking to a general video you are implying that this is how RCV works, that you HAVE to rank 5, otherwise it won’t count, which is false. That’s not what you meant, but this is how it appears to other readers who would not be aware of your original misunderstanding. Those of us who actually like RCV feel an obligation to step in and correct you, all of us at once, to pre-empt the hazard of somebody else believing in your (unintentional) implication and ending up with the wrong idea that “wow, RCV sucks! your ballot gets thrown out if you don’t fill in all 5 bubbles perfectly!”
Well put, thanks.
Whoo boy, you should have been in Portland when we did it:
Mayor:
City Council (3 open seats per district):
Several implementations of it in Australia are full preferential, and require ranking all candidates (and there’s a kind of hybrid optional implementation in the federal senate where there is a minimum but you can rank as many as you want). The NYC one is still optional preferential actually, which is in my view a bad system because people get tricked into “just voting 1” and their vote consequently has less power to influence the result.