Ranked Choice Voting is Another Method of Voter Fraud

 

Screenshot (Public Domain)


Ranked choice voting has garnered significant attention in recent years as a potential solution to the flaws and inefficiencies of the traditional voting system. Proponents argue that ranked choice voting allows for a more representative and inclusive democracy by eliminating the spoiler effect and ensuring that candidates with broader support are elected. However, this system is not truly democratic for a variety of reasons.

One of the key criticisms is that it can be confusing and complex for voters to understand. In order for the system to work effectively, voters must rank candidates in order of preference, which can be difficult for some individuals to navigate.

This system can lead to a lack of transparency and accountability in the election process. With traditional voting systems, the candidate with the most votes wins, providing a clear and straightforward outcome. However, ranked choice voting introduces the possibility of multiple rounds of voting and complicated algorithms to determine the winner, potentially undermining the clarity and legitimacy of election results (election fraud).

Ranked choice voting will also dilute the impact of individual votes. In a ranked choice system, voters are asked to rank candidates in order of preference, meaning that their vote may be transferred to their second or third choice if their top choice is eliminated. This raises concerns about whether voters' true preferences are accurately reflected in the final outcome.

Additionally, ranked choice voting can exacerbate political polarization and reduce the likelihood of consensus-building among elected officials. In a traditional voting system, candidates are incentivized to appeal to a broad base of voters in order to win the majority of votes. However, in a ranked choice system, candidates focus more on mobilizing their core supporters and appealing to niche groups in order to secure second or third preferences.

This voting system will disenfranchise voters who are unable or unwilling to rank candidates in order of preference. This is particularly problematic for individuals with limited time or resources to research candidates and make informed decisions about their rankings.

Ranked choice voting will not accurately reflect the will of the majority of voters. In a traditional voting system, the candidate with the most votes wins, providing a clear and decisive outcome. However, in a ranked choice system, the candidate who ultimately wins may not have received the majority of first preference votes, raising questions about the legitimacy of the outcome.

Maine was the first state in the U.S. to use ranked choice voting in statewide elections, starting in 2018. The system has been used in both primary and general elections, including for races for governor, Congress, and the state legislature. Alaska also adopted ranked choice voting in 2020 through a ballot initiative. The state now uses the system for general elections for state and federal offices. In 2021, New York City implemented ranked choice voting for its mayoral elections.

While Democrats tout this voting system as a “fairer and more representative electoral system”, it actually opens the door to potential fraud and manipulation. Ranked choice voting invites fraud is through the strategic manipulation of rankings by voters or political operatives. For example, voters could strategically rank a weaker candidate higher in order to knock out a stronger candidate, or a political campaign could engage in deceptive tactics to influence how voters rank candidates. This kind of manipulation undermines the will of the electorate and distort the outcome of the election. Democrats are infamous for influencing “the right candidate.”

Traditional voting systems are already susceptible to lots of fraud but ranked choice voting introduces additional layers of complexity that can make it harder to identify irregularities or discrepancies. This creates opportunities for unscrupulous individuals to exploit weaknesses in the system and subvert the democratic process.

Ranked choice voting should considered voter fraud because of high potential for manipulation by political parties or interest groups. These entities may use their resources and influence to strategically rank candidates in order to achieve a certain outcome. This will result in the suppression of certain candidates or the manipulation of election results in favor of a particular group or agenda.

On the Connecticut November 2024 ballot, there is a referendum proposing a “No Excuse Absentee Ballot” system, officially known as HRJ 1, It poses severe risks to fairness and election integrity. This "system," if passed would enshrine and guarantee massive voter fraud in Connecticut.

Rest assured, the Democrat majority is already working on Ranked Choice voting. We must not allow it to happen in Connecticut or any other state. It’s very important that we vote America First candidates in November.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Interview With Tod Laudonia, Republican Candidate for Connecticut House, 151st District

Image
  Screenshot (votefortod.com Campaign Website) GVAT recently reached out to Greenwich Resident Tod Laudonia, Republican, running for the Connecticut State House representing the 151st district. Laudonia is no stranger to to public office having served four terms as Greenwich Tax Collector and 14 years on the Representative Town Meeting (RTM) where he served on the Transportation and Parks and Recreation Committees. His family has been a staple of the 151st district (Cos Cob) for more than a century and is well known in Town and beyond. We wish to thank Mr. Laudonia for his time in answering these written interview questions. You can learn more about Tod Laudonia's campaign by visiting his website  Here Q: Why are you running for State Representative of the 151st District? A: I am running because I feel as though Hartford could use an injection of common sense. We have gone on long enough with elected officials who hold themselves above those who elected them. They are now in the
Read more

An Open Letter to the Board of Education

Image
Screenshot (Public Domain) Dear Board of Education Members, We are writing today to ask that you not renew the contract for Superintendent Dr. Toni Jones. We are Greenwich Voices For Accountability and Transparency, an alliance of taxpayers, concerned residents, grandparents, parents, families, business owners and everyone with a vested interest in our communities in Greenwich who want to preserve and protect our Town through proper governance and engagement. We represent many parents within our organization with children attending schools across the district. We stand united in our resolve to see a change in the school district leadership position of Superintendent. The Superintendent of Schools in Greenwich is the educational leader responsible for overseeing the school district and ensuring high-quality education for all students. This individual holds a crucial role in the community, working closely with administrators, teachers, parents, and students to ensure that the district
Read more

Dear Establishment Republicans, We're Tired of Your "Bipartisanship"

Image
  Screenshot (Public Domain) Bipartisanship, the concept of both political parties working together towards common goals, is often seen as a key component of a functioning democracy. In a state like Connecticut, where the political landscape is largely dominated by Democrats, the idea of bipartisanship only benefits one side of the aisle. This is because bipartisanship tends to work in favor of the party that holds power, which in Connecticut's case, is the Democratic Party. Despite the intentions of bipartisanship to promote compromise and cooperation between parties, it always leads to unequal outcomes and favoritism of the Democrat agenda. One of the main reasons why bipartisanship always works in favor of Connecticut Democrats is the sheer number of Democratic representatives in the state legislature. With Democrats holding a majority in both the state House and Senate, they have more power to push their agenda and initiatives through, even with some bipartisan support. This
Read more