AK-AL Special election: Peltola wins!

[It’s so Joever]

“And the results of not one, but TWO tests have come in. Ms. Peltola…”

Writing's not easy. That's why Grammarly can help. This sentence is grammatically correct, but it's wordy, and hard to read. It undermines the writer's message and the word choice is bland. Grammarly's cutting edge technology helps you craft compelling, understandable writing that makes an impact on your reader. Much better. Are you ready to give it a try? Installation is simple and free. Visit Grammarly.com today!

[Gracile]

https://twitter.com/iris_samuels/status/1564753716540223489

That sounds as awkward as when a winner is named in Miss America, or a reality competition show, or something.

That's actually how every UK Parliamentary election winner is announced.

It still sounds uncomfortable to watch.

No, it's amazing and it's a pity results of US House elections don't have announcement proclamations with as much gravitas.

[Continential]

https://twitter.com/iris_samuels/status/1564753716540223489

That sounds as awkward as when a winner is named in Miss America, or a reality competition show, or something.

That's actually how every UK Parliamentary election winner is announced.

It still sounds uncomfortable to watch.

It’s the best part when watching British election nights.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

https://twitter.com/iris_samuels/status/1564753716540223489

That sounds as awkward as when a winner is named in Miss America, or a reality competition show, or something.

That's actually how every UK Parliamentary election winner is announced.

It still sounds uncomfortable to watch.

It’s the best part when watching British election nights.

Portillo Moment = Peltola Moment?

Yes please. 

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Will the results be released all at once?

[Holmes]

Will the results be released all at once?

Probably not. Seems like the calculations will be happening live on stream so we'll see it happen in real time. Who knows how long it will take but it should be quite the show.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

People who complain about tactical dropouts I think miss the point, while it's true that Alaska picked a pretty weird-ass system for ranked voting (I say either do the Twin Cities model of having no first round at all and just have all the candidates run against each other in one ranked contest or the NYC/Maine model of having a traditional primary and general election but use ranked voting for both), the main reason there was such a push is Alaska has a strong tradition of third parties, and while the Alaska Independence Party and Libertarians haven't done well this year, that doesn't mean they or any other third party never will ever again, this would allow a way around the spoiler effect. It also makes the elections involving Murkowski quite neater. Now if you get a system in place where every time there's more than one Democrat or Republican making the second round and then one drops out, is that any different from just having a normal primary? It might not be what's intended, but it's hardly something that nullifies the point of the ranked voting.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

https://twitter.com/iris_samuels/status/1564753716540223489

That sounds as awkward as when a winner is named in Miss America, or a reality competition show, or something.

That's actually how every UK Parliamentary election winner is announced.

It still sounds uncomfortable to watch.

It’s the best part when watching British election nights.

Theresa May, Lord Buckethead, Elmo, and the head of the Monster Raving Loony Party on the same stage in 2017 was exceptional

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZxZlSZrPeQ

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

People who complain about tactical dropouts I think miss the point, while it's true that Alaska picked a pretty weird-ass system for ranked voting (I say either do the Twin Cities model of having no first round at all and just have all the candidates run against each other in one ranked contest or the NYC/Maine model of having a traditional primary and general election but use ranked voting for both), the main reason there was such a push is Alaska has a strong tradition of third parties, and while the Alaska Independence Party and Libertarians haven't done well this year, that doesn't mean they or any other third party never will ever again, this would allow a way around the spoiler effect. It also makes the elections involving Murkowski quite neater. Now if you get a system in place where every time there's more than one Democrat or Republican making the second round and then one drops out, is that any different from just having a normal primary? It might not be what's intended, but it's hardly something that nullifies the point of the ranked voting.

It’s a very different situation because two Republicans running against each other in a primary don’t deny a spot on the general election ballot to a candidate of another party.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

https://twitter.com/iris_samuels/status/1564753716540223489

That sounds as awkward as when a winner is named in Miss America, or a reality competition show, or something.

That's actually how every UK Parliamentary election winner is announced.

It still sounds uncomfortable to watch.

It actually can be really interesting as you get people like Lord Buckethead on the same stage as Theresa May. Very egalitarian if you ask me

[Bernie Derangement Syndrome Haver]

...if Palin wins by a squeaker, or Peltola wins the special?

If Peltola wins does either Palin or Begich drop out to consolidate the Republican vote?
Do Republicans not exhaust as many ballots and rank a 2nd choice to prevent Peltola from winning?

If Peltola wins I just can't see her winning again because Republicans will learn from their mistakes.

[Holmes]

Begich will stay in because he can present himself as the more electable Republican. Palin will stay in because she will have been the candidate who came the closest and just barely lost. Both are valid arguments. Peltola might also get an incumbency boost in November, however small that may be, but it can help in another tight race.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW the way UK Parliament election results are announced is in my opinion one of those quirky British traditions that's fine remaining a quirky British tradition but really just don't make sense anywhere else (much like how they don't allow resignations on paper so resignations have to be done by being appointed to those absolutely powerless positions which the resigner keeps until the next resignation) so I'm hoping this doesn't continue.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

It's kinda interesting that you can meet with the British PM for a deposit.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

What time does it start with the time difference?

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

https://twitter.com/iris_samuels/status/1564753716540223489

That sounds as awkward as when a winner is named in Miss America, or a reality competition show, or something.

That's actually how every UK Parliamentary election winner is announced.

It still sounds uncomfortable to watch.

It’s the best part when watching British election nights.

Theresa May, Lord Buckethead, Elmo, and the head of the Monster Raving Loony Party on the same stage in 2017 was exceptional

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZxZlSZrPeQ

My favorite is 2019 when Lord Buckethead & Elmo were the only candidates Boris Johnson acknowledged by name.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

A little different from that, but Delaware's Return Day is sort of similar.

[Kabam]

As a Democrat I'm all for whatever helps Democrats flip/hold this seat, but what is the point of implementing the top-four RCV if candidates are just going to drop out strategically? Obviously understand the two-party system prioritizes victory at any cost, but are we not even going to let the system play out even once?

Honestly I like the new system used in Alaska. I'd also argue that the dropping out was not strategical or at least did not strategically benefit any party. Sweeney dropped out, because there was not any chance for her with her disappointing result to get out of fourth place. Gross also probably realized there was not a way to get ahead for him, as he only placed barely above Peltola. And he probably knew that Democrats would rally around Peltola, because iirc he had some trouble with the Alaska Democratic Party. Anyway, it was always either him or Peltola in the top 2 after one of them was eliminated.

I also think the top 4 system is better than the system used in Maine, because it also allows more moderate politicians of the two major parties like for example Murkowski make the general election. Third parties in the US are historically very weak, so we will most likely see multiple Dems or Reps of different party factions make the top 4. But it still gives third parties a chance, if they can coalesce enough voters to make the top 4. Otherwise, they would have most likely been eliminated before the Republican and Democrat candidate anyway.

Having all candidates only run in a general can be a mess, if 10 or even 20 candidates run. Besides counting being difficult, it is very difficult for voters. There is no way the average voter can rank them all or even remember, who those candidates are. The number of 4 is a bit arbitrary, could also be 5 or 6 I guess. But it is very unlikely that someone placing fifth or lower can win the general anyway. In most cases 10% will be enough to qualify. Although Peltola may very well win the special election, only placing fourth in the primary.

[GeorgiaModerate]

What time does it start with the time difference?

8pm EDT

[Ferguson97]

If Palin wins, she probably wins in November.

If Peltola wins, and Begich drops out, Palin probably wins in November.

If Peltola wins, and Palin drops out, Begich likely wins in November.

If Peltola wins, and both Begich and Palin stay in, Peltola likely wins in November.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Why would either candidate drop out?  The whole RCV system is created to avoid situations where we should have to worry about spoilers and thus there should be no pressure to drop out. 

In fact, there should be a very strong expectations that anyone who advances in the primary should continue to campaign through the general election.  Candidates dropping out after they have finished Top 4 (and thus denying a ballot spot to someone else), seriously damages the integrity of the reform.

[Ferguson97]

Why would either candidate drop out?  The whole RCV system is created to avoid situations where we should have to worry about spoilers and thus there should be no pressure to drop out. 

In fact, there should be a very strong expectations that anyone who advances in the primary should continue to campaign through the general election.  Candidates dropping out after they have finished Top 4 (and thus denying a ballot spot to someone else), seriously damages the integrity of the reform.

Strategic voting is still a thing.

If the race is between Peltola and Palin, then Begich—>Peltola—>Palin voters might switch and rank Palin over Peltola. Since RCV with two candidates is effectively FPTP, they might find it harder to justify ranking a Dem 1st than 2nd.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Why would either candidate drop out?  The whole RCV system is created to avoid situations where we should have to worry about spoilers and thus there should be no pressure to drop out. 

In fact, there should be a very strong expectations that anyone who advances in the primary should continue to campaign through the general election.  Candidates dropping out after they have finished Top 4 (and thus denying a ballot spot to someone else), seriously damages the integrity of the reform.

Strategic voting is still a thing.

If the race is between Peltola and Palin, then Begich—>Peltola—>Palin voters might switch and rank Palin over Peltola. Since RCV with two candidates is effectively FPTP, they might find it harder to justify ranking a Dem 1st than 2nd.

I don't understand how this would be "strategic" voting.  You are saying people who rank Palin last would end up ranking Palin first if she were heads up against Peltola?  How is this strategic?

[Хahar 🤔]

Why would either candidate drop out?  The whole RCV system is created to avoid situations where we should have to worry about spoilers and thus there should be no pressure to drop out. 

Instant-runoff voting does not satisfy what Wikipedia (presumably following the academic literature) refers to as the independence of irrelevant alternatives criterion, and is thus still subject to spoiler candidates. It is important to recall here that Gross finished ahead of Peltola. Let's suppose that there are a significant number of Begich–Peltola–Palin–Gross voters. If Gross had stayed in the race and again outpolled Peltola, thereby eliminating her, then in a Palin–Gross final round those voters would have gone to Palin. In a Palin–Peltola final round, they instead go to Peltola.

Instant-runoff systems provide a strong incentive to vote strategically for more "electable" candidates. When candidates drop out in a system like this one, they ensure that voters will effectively have to vote strategically. If Gross viewed himself as less electable and prioritized electing a Democrat, then his choice to drop out has worked exactly as planned.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/IvanMoore1/status/1564837133096914946

4 PM AST = 8 PM EDT.