Posted: 9/21/2024 3:49:03 AM EDT
|
I'm getting mailers against question 3, paid for by the Nevada state democratic party. I don't think question 3 is a good idea, but is it possible that I agree with the democrats? Anyone have any insight that I'm not aware of? |
|
I hadn't really looked into this until just recently. I found this article that seems fairly even handed (admittedly the Nevada "Independent" is left leaning like most other media): https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/indy-explains-question-3-would-see-ranked-choice-voting-open-primaries-in-nevada On the basis of big outside money supporting it, and the fact that both major parties officially oppose it, I'd say this sounds like a bad deal. One interesting takeaway though is that there are a more non-partisan registered voters than democrat or Republican Party members in NV. On that basis, and that one alone, it would seem that's a large group who don't get shit to say about who the candidates would be in the general election and the open primary would solve that. Regardless though, I'm not in favor. If you want to vote in the primary, join the party that you want to. Sitting on the fence means that you get what you get. |
| I am always cautious any time they want me to change the constitution and from what I remember I have always voted against it. Seem like a way for more shenanigans. I don't like being locked into the bullshit two party system I'm just not sure this helps. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: I am always cautious any time they want me to change the constitution and from what I remember I have always voted against it. Seem like a way for more shenanigans. I don't like being locked into the bullshit two party system I'm just not sure this helps. Agreed. In very few and limited instances do I support messing with the constitution. Maybe if they tied it to a voter ID requirement... |
|
I think I will support Question 3 this time. First of all, I actually think RCV makes some sense after learning about it. Second of all, Nevada's elections are pretty close and I've noticed that there have been right-wing third party (such as the Independent American Party) and/or non-partisan candidates in some elections (here's one example) that have a lot of overlap in policy positions with the state Republican party. Thirdly, I would actually support more conservative/libertarian-leaning candidates as my first choice under a RCV system without worrying about helping the candidate with whom I have the least policy agreement win the election. |
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: I am always cautious any time they want me to change the constitution and from what I remember I have always voted against it. Seem like a way for more shenanigans. I don't like being locked into the bullshit two party system I'm just not sure this helps. Attached File I'm with you. I always discard (NO) all proposed changes to the constitution (someone always wanted to tweak it to/for their own benefits), and Question 3 is no different, I read it and it is just another way to throw out the legitimacy of party affiliation during the primaries (so who will this benefit? of course, the one with lots of money for ads to get everyone to jump in and mess up the party primary system) |
|
Originally Posted By bravo5two: /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/this-gif-793.gif I'm with you. I always discard (NO) all proposed changes to the constitution (someone always wanted to tweak it to/for their own benefits), and Question 3 is no different, I read it and it is just another way to throw out the legitimacy of party affiliation during the primaries (so who will this benefit? of course, the one with lots of money for ads to get everyone to jump in and mess up the party primary system) I'm usually skeptical about constitutional changes myself, but Question 7 is Voter ID. In terms of the open primary in Q3, the five candidates with the most votes in the primary would advance out of the primary, so it's not like only two candidates would make it to the general election. I was initially opposed to RCV, but I've come around on it somewhat. |
|
There was an organized dem movement to register GOP this year to vote for Halley in an attempt to get rid of trump. DNC doesn't have fair primaries, so dems don't need to vote in them, if they are even allowed, and this just makes it easier for dems to control the GOP nomination It's a horrible idea. |
|
Originally Posted By shblackdragon: There was an organized dem movement to register GOP this year to vote for Halley in an attempt to get rid of trump. DNC doesn't have fair primaries, so dems don't need to vote in them, if they are even allowed, and this just makes it easier for dems to control the GOP nomination It's a horrible idea. I agree with this. |
Eitek1: ANTIFA just destroys, hurts, silences and harms. The people they hate are better than they will ever be.
| I voted no. Lots of questions this year. I really need to do better and research ahead of time. I voted yes on voter ID hopefully that's just what it says |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
After doing a little more research outside the badly to deceptively worded questions I went with: 1. No 2. No 3. HELL NO! 4. No 5. Yes 6. No 7. Yes My reasoning for most of it is changing the State Constitution so often to try and keep up with the times weakens its overall integrity and can lead to 2nd/3rd order effects. For example on question 4: The main argument against Nevada's Ballot Question 4 focuses on potential "unintended consequences" for the criminal justice system, particularly around prison labor. Some legal experts and policymakers worry that eliminating the constitutional allowance for involuntary servitude as punishment for crimes could create legal ambiguities. This could affect requirements for prison labor, community service, and parole programs, as these might be interpreted as forms of involuntary servitude. |
|
This went from dark green to this red slash. Looks suspicious... Attached File |
We can do this right, or we can do it right now.