Alaska in 2022

[vcczar]

Here's the situation in Alaska:

2018	2020	2022
Trump	Trump	Trump
Dunleavy	Dunleavy
Murkowski	Murkowski
Sullivan	Sullivan	Sullivan
Young	Young

 

As you can see, this state has three elections. The state isn't quite as solid red as Alabama, but it does seem likely stay Red. You can see that the elections of Dunleavy and Young showed some strength in the Democratic losses, as the solid Red is for a landslide victory. 

Anyone have any thoughts on these races?

[Rezi]

Gubernatorial could be an interesting race, with former Gov. Walker running as an independent and RCV in use.

[ShortKing]

Given Young's stature and influence, I'm surprised that his margins don't seem quite as impressive as one might have anticipated.

[jvikings1]

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

Here's the situation in Alaska:

 

2018	2020	2022
Trump	Trump	Trump
Dunleavy	Dunleavy
Murkowski	Murkowski
Sullivan	Sullivan	Sullivan
Young	Young

 

As you can see, this state has three elections. The state isn't quite as solid red as Alabama, but it does seem likely stay Red. You can see that the elections of Dunleavy and Young showed some strength in the Democratic losses, as the solid Red is for a landslide victory. 

Anyone have any thoughts on these races?

It seems like independent candidates tend to do better against Republicans than Democrats do. Young’s last 2 races were against an independent. And Sullivan faced an independent. And the last non-R governor was an independent.

[Rezi]

Alaska is a state that most people have kinda just ignored in the fact that it's moving towards the Dems.

Dem vote share in Alaska has been very steadily rising in the last 2 decades and Biden had the best performance there out of any Dem since LBJ. With Alaska's very independent, moderate reputation, I could see a moderate Dem winning statewide in the next decade if the conditions are right.

Edited July 11, 2022 by Rezi

[WVProgressive]

2 hours ago, Patine said:

And there was the AIP Governor prior to Bill Walker I pointed out, as well. I mean, Alaska elected a unabashed State Secessionist and Independentist in 1990!

Wally Hickel was not a secessionist. He was the moderate Republican Governor of Alaska from 1966-1969, and was only using the AIP party as a vehicle to get elected. Hickel rejoined his native Republican party at the tail end of his term in 1994 was a very vocal proponent of Alaskan statehood his entire political career.

[jvikings1]

Begich is favored to win the house seat. Though Palin winning wouldn’t be a surprise. It’ll be interesting to see if the special/regular election splits in result based on turnout differences.

Murkowski is favored to win re-election. Though it’s not out of the question that Tshibaka wins. Murkowski will benefit from more Dem support than GOP support.

GOP will hold the governor’s seat.

[Rezi]

On 7/10/2022 at 8:43 PM, Rezi said:

Alaska is a state that most people have kinda just ignored in the fact that it's moving towards the Dems.

Dem vote share in Alaska has been very steadily rising in the last 2 decades and Biden had the best performance there out of any Dem since LBJ. With Alaska's very independent, moderate reputation, I could see a moderate Dem winning statewide in the next decade if the conditions are right.

When I said the next decade I didn’t mean this year

[Hestia]

16 minutes ago, Rezi said:

When I said the next decade I didn’t mean this year

Peltolamentum

[vcczar]

41 minutes ago, Hestia said:

Peltolamentum

Who would have predicted?!

[vcczar]

If anything shows that this is a bad midterm year for the out of power party it is this. I mean, it’s a RED state against a party with a president with a 41% approval rating. The GOPs nominee is the basically the national forerunner of Trump. HOW EMBARRASSING!!!! I expected a Democrat defeat, possibly a landslide defeat. What a pleasant surprise. I applaud Alaskans for being rational. 

[jvikings1]

This is probably the least useful indication from an election though. First time using RCV in an election (large numbers of spoiled ballots). A candidate in Palin that still hasn't recovered from her resignation in 2009 (a big issue during the race). And the 2 Republicans beating each other up while the Dem avoided confrontation.

Dems can thank Murkowski for this result more than anything.

[Rezi]

17 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

This is probably the least useful indication from an election though. First time using RCV in an election (large numbers of spoiled ballots). A candidate in Palin that still hasn't recovered from her resignation in 2009 (a big issue during the race). And the 2 Republicans beating each other up while the Dem avoided confrontation.

Dems can thank Murkowski for this result more than anything.

What are your thoughts on RCV as a system? I've seen lots of Libertarians in favor of it and lots of Conservatives against it (which makes sense since Republicans lost both ME-2 2018 and AK-AL Special because they couldn't coalition build with RCV as well as Dems), interested to hear your view.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Rezi

[jvikings1]

10 hours ago, Rezi said:

What are your thoughts on RCV as a system? I've seen lots of Libertarians in favor of it and lots of Conservatives against it (which makes sense since Republicans lost both ME-2 2018 and AK-AL Special because they couldn't coalition build with RCV as well as Dems), interested to hear your view.

RCV is stupid and unnecessarily confusing for voters. If you want to do multiple rounds, use Louisiana's jungle primary system with the top 2 vote getters moving to a final round (unless someone is over 50% on the first ballot).

[Rezi]

8 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

RCV is stupid and unnecessarily confusing for voters. If you want to do multiple rounds, use Louisiana's jungle primary system with the top 2 vote getters moving to a final round (unless someone is over 50% on the first ballot).

I think if "rank candidates from 1-4" is too confusing for voters, then that's a voter problem and not a voting system problem.

[pilight]

I recall voters being confused by butterfly ballots.  RCV would really perplex them.

OTOH Australia has used RCV for more than a century.  It seems unlikely their voters are significantly more intelligent than US voters.

[jvikings1]

4 hours ago, Rezi said:

I think if "rank candidates from 1-4" is too confusing for voters, then that's a voter problem and not a voting system problem.

There are still large chunks of voters who don't even know that primary elections only include candidates of a specific party. And that's about as basic as it gets. Complain about the voters all you want, that's what we have right now. But I'm not going to support a system that makes things more complicated when voters don't even understand what we have right now.

Also, a random poll doesn't prove anything, especially from a biased source.

Edited September 1, 2022 by jvikings1

[Hestia]

Just now, jvikings1 said:

There are still large chunks of voters who don't even know that primary elections only include candidates of a specific party. And that's about as basic as it gets. Complain about the voters all you want, that's what we have right now. But I'm not going to support a system that makes things more complicated when voters don't even understand what we have right now.

Also, a random poll doesn't prove anything, especially from a biased source.

Voters chose the system in Alaska. That's about as democratic as you can get. It's up to the voters to educate themselves about the system that they chose. I have no idea on God's green Earth why someone couldn't understand the simple instruction of "rank candidates 1-4". It's elementary level thinking. You're just fishing for a reason to oppose it when there's no empirical data to suggest that voters don't understand RCV. What about the below is actually confusing?

[Pringles]

31 minutes ago, Hestia said:

Voters chose the system in Alaska. That's about as democratic as you can get. It's up to the voters to educate themselves about the system that they chose. I have no idea on God's green Earth why someone couldn't understand the simple instruction of "rank candidates 1-4". It's elementary level thinking. You're just fishing for a reason to oppose it when there's no empirical data to suggest that voters don't understand RCV. What about the below is actually confusing?

The only way this gets confusing is if you bring back punch-cards (in a vertical orientation) instead of bubbling it in. Maybe that’s what he really wants 😛