The US will do everything in its power to dismantle socialism and convince people that it “doesn’t work” (just ignore how much work they put in to dismantle it)

At least you’re honest about your ignorance

I don’t see it being on the radar of the major parties at the moment. RCV is in the spotlight so far. But that can change very soon because in Eugene, Oregon this week they are finishing up getting STAR on the ballot for their elections, then they’re also pushing for it to appear on the state ballot in May. The effort is led by non-partisan groups like the equal vote coalition.

So far my conversations with both sides of the aisle have been fruitful, and I hope that is how it continues

Well the thing about that is, RCV has been repealed in 6 states and counting for producing poor results. And it’s also given right wing groups like the heritage foundation a foothold to attack it. I’m actually seeing negative RCV sentiment on the ground when I talk to people about STAR so their message is spreading. When I explain STAR and how it fixes several of RCVs issues they come around to it, so it may in fact be better to push that instead of tag along with RCV if it’s going to end up being a waste of political capital

RCV is a rebrand of the voting method IRV, which was used by many cities in the early 20th century. Due to inconsistent results, it was repealed. So, unfortunately, conservatives have a leg to stand on when they attack RCV.

For clarity: their specific attacks take things to the extreme and often have some racist underpinnings, but there is a kernel of truth to attacking specifically on the method itself.

That is why I support something like STAR voting, it doesn’t suffer from many of RCV’s issues

I wish your ballot measure luck however, because at the end of the day it still is, mildly better than FPTP

RCV will do nothing to break the duopoly in America. RCV will basically allow you to vote for the Democrats or Republicans without bubbling their name on your ballot.

Contrary to what is stated, RCV falls apart as soon as more than 2 parties become viable. It suffers from the spoiler effect.

RCV, like plurality voting, only reflects your preference for one candidate at a time. In fact, it’s relatively accurate to say that RCV is just plurality with (literally) extra steps (rounds).

One of the better ballot changes we can make is to move to something like STAR voting, which can capture the nuance of magnitude of preference for ALL candidates at once.

However, changing voting method alone is not enough. Proportional representation and expanding the number of elected officials are two powerful ways to introduce new ideas and break up power structures.

And, of course, campaign finance reform such as democracy vouchers

No, it’s not.

Given ballot options of Socialists, Democrats, and Republicans, I’d rank them 1, 2, and 3, respectively. However, when expressing my feelings about the election: I love the Socialists, dislike the Republicans, and prefer the Democrats slightly over the Republicans.

This nuanced opinion isn’t captured on a ranked ballot.

With a score ballot, like STAR voting, I’d give the Socialists 5 stars, the Democrats 1 star, and the Republicans 0 stars. This method not only captures my preferences but also the depth of my feelings for each party. This is then reflected in both the final score and the automatic runoff step of tabulation.

I prefer score ballots over ranked ballots, expressing magnitude of preference is important!

Ranked choice specifically is one of the worst ranked ballot options out there and I hope we can push for something else

Multi account containers is the reason I use Firefox over ungoogled chromium

In the face of extreme climatic upheavals, California’s bid to unveil corporate contributions to climate change is vehemently obstructed by big industries, reflecting the stark chasm between professed “net-zero commitments” and actual corporate accountability. The insidious dance of greenwashing, underpinned by millions in lobbying, is a stark reminder that true societal transformation demands more than hollow corporate rhetoric.

Currently using signal but have been intrigued by some of the no phone number alternatives like SimpleX

Capitalism gonna capitalize…

The attempt by billionaire real estate moguls to overturn New York City’s rent stabilization law is nothing but the ruling class wielding its power to exploit the many for the benefit of the few. This isn’t just about rents in New York; it’s a manifestation of the capitalist system where the rights of property owners are sacred, but the rights of those who need shelter are negotiable. It’s a blatant class assault, a vivid example of how the rich and powerful manipulate the legal system, including the Supreme Court, to suppress the masses and perpetuate their own wealth and dominance.

The portrayal of “Bidenomics” as a success story serves as a classic illustration of how power structures manipulate economic indicators to project an image of prosperity, obscuring the underlying reality. While the figures may indicate growth and a decrease in unemployment, they are detached from the lived experiences of millions who continue to suffer from food insecurity and financial hardship. The discontinuation of essential aid programs reflects a broader systemic failure, where policies are shaped by elite interests at the expense of the vulnerable. It’s a pattern we’ve seen repeatedly in the history of state-corporate management of the economy, where the welfare of the general population is subordinated to concentrated private power.

There’s only been a limited selection up until this point

Not sure how to respond to this, but no it did not 😅

The contradiction between Justice Alito’s prior commitment to ethics laws and his current stance reveals a fundamental tension in our understanding of power and accountability. This incident serves as a reflection of a broader system where principles often succumb to the mechanisms of authority, exposing the frailty of ethical commitments in the face of institutionalized power.