Well, my money’s on Tarquin Fintim-Limbim-Whimbim-Lim Bus Stop-F’Tang-F’Tang-Olé-Biscuit-Barrel: Monty Python's Flying Circus - Election Night Special - YouTube
After a Federal judge refuses to stop the count over a GOP constitutional challenge to Maine’s ranked-choice voting system, it’s another Dem win there: The Latest: Democrat flips U.S. House seat in Maine
An interesting Q&A on ranked-choice voting: https://www.pressherald.com/2018/11/15/qa-everything-you-need-to-know-about-maines-ranked-choice-voting/
Thanks a lot for this, Elendil’s Heir. I am not sure how I feel about this ranked-choice thing. How about you?
Meanwhile, Young Kim (R) trails her Dem opponent by > 900 votes in CA-39.
It makes sense to me, and I would vote to adopt it if it ever came up here. As it happens, I was just emailing with my aunt, who lives in Maine (but not in the Congressional district at issue), and she really likes it.
As she wrote (lightly edited):
*I am a big fan of ranked choice voting and it worked perfectly. It eliminates third-party spoilers and lets one vote for the person you think is best even though they likely do not have a chance to win. If we had had it in our gubernatorial race we would not have had to endure [Gov.] Paul LePage for the past four years!
I especially like being able to vote for the candidate you like without “wasting” your vote on a candidate who may not have a chance to win in a slate that includes many people. A side, but big, benefit includes removing the need for and expense of a runoff election. The results of the election are known sooner than if a runoff is needed… *
There’s a Maine state government video here which is also informative: Bureau of Corporations, Elections & Commissions
I think the point that is fair to be made about RCV is that there are already states that accomplish the same goal, but do so with multiple rounds of voting, which seems to me an expensive way to do the same thing. Mississippi goes to the polls again shortly, just to choose between two people who were really the people they were choosing between before, just this time it’s guaranteed one or the other will win by majority vote (unless they were to tie). Why not just eliminate the need for the mechanics of a run-off?
If Kim loses, that means that all six of the Orange County Congressional seats will be held by Democrats, after going into the election with four of the six being held by Republicans. Orange County, the home of the John Birch Society and the former center of right wing politics in California.
Yeah, this election likely represents a sea change for the area.
A mild disagreement broke out a little while back in an unrelated thread about politics in and around Santa Barbara, with one poster insisting that it a conservative stronghold. And it used to be and not all that long ago. But not anymore.
Orange slowly seems to be going the same way. I’m almost certain that Republicans will reclaim a couple of those seats eventually for a term or two - these were very tight races. It might even see-saw every election or stay moderately tilted towards Republicans. But the fact that it isn’t a foregone conclusion anymore is significant. I’m sure she’ll get called a RINO by some of her peers, but CA GOP vice-chair Kristin Olsen’s recent eulogy for her party in CA has the ring of reality to it.
Trump mocked Congresswoman Mia Love (R-Utah) as a loser for not embracing him; now it looks like she’s winning: Republican Mia Love pulls ahead in Utah House race after Trump knocked her for losing | CNN Politics
IIRC the race in CA-21 had been called for David Valadao, the Republican, but there are still a good number of ballots to be counted, and Nate Silver says it’s a tossup at this point.
From Nate Silver’s Twitter stream (link above), a summary of his take on the outstanding House races:
NY-22: Nate’s calling this one for Brindisi (D), joining ABC in doing so.
NY-27: likely R.
TX-23: likely R.
GA-07: likely R. (This one’s going to a recount with the R ahead by ~420 votes. Nate: barely within the range that might be changed by a recount.)
UT-04: lean R.
CA-39: likely D.
CA-21: tossup.
Still subject to change, of course, but Gil Cisneros’ lead over Young Kim is currently over 3,000 votes.
(emphasis mine)
If ranked-choice voting has a chance to catch on, it will probably be because of this issue (of reducing costs).
It certainly does seem sensible, and at this point there are quite a few examples around the world of it working well. (There’s a pretty comprehensive list of nations, states or provinces, and municipalities that use RCV or close variants at wikipedia:
While I can’t quite bring myself to say “I hope the Republican wins,” that small consolation will take some of the sting out of it.
Dave Wasserman of Cook Political Reports projects Cisneros as the winner in CA-39.
Assuming he and Nate Silver are right about CA-39 and NY-22, respectively, that brings the Dems up to 233 House seats.
That may well be as many as they get; 3 of the remaining 5 I listed in post #672 are races that Silver rates ‘likely R’ and it’s plain that each is very likely R. UT-4 looks like it’s solidifying for Mia Love. And I’m not seeing what Silver sees in CA-21. I’d be happy if the Dems win any of the final 5.
But a gain of 38 seats, and a 233-202 majority, are pretty damned good.
It also means that Orange County–once the bastion of California conservatism–is entirely Democratic. Orange County was the first place Obama went in California to campaign for this election, and it seems to have paid off.
This is the district where my mom spent a HUGE amount of effort on canvassing and get-out-the-vote (for Cisneros). So very gratifying to see it turn blue.
And AP called it for Cisneros last night. Your mom did good!
Hear, hear!