• tomenzgg@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Considering the other side is – in multiple states – outright outlawing proportional representation, voting for the person not actively making that goal more difficult is, definitionally, still harm reduction.

        • tomenzgg@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’ve somewhat misspoke as they targeted, specifically, Ranked-Choice Voting rather than specifically the multi-candidate part but I feel like the proportional part is missed if you leave FPtP in place without an alternative like RCV so I don’t think that’s still wrong, per se; and I’d fully expect someone who’d outlaw RCV to be against anything fully proportional.

          These are the states RCV’s been outlawed:

          • Alabama (2024)
          • Arkansas (2025)
          • Florida (2023)
          • Idaho (2023)
          • Iowa (2025)
          • Kansas (2025)
          • Kentucky (2024)
          • Louisiana (2024)
          • Mississippi (2024)
          • Missouri (2024)
          • Montana (2023)
          • North Dakota (2025)
          • Oklahoma (2024)
          • South Dakota (2023)
          • Tennessee (2022)
          • West Virginia (2025)
          • Wyoming (2025)