I covered Ranked Choice Voting back in April (full article here) speculating that the system could help Oakland mayoral candidate Kaplan.
Well, candidates Kaplan and Quan put their heads together and effectively beat the system. Projected winner former State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata actually won the popular vote, at 35%. But it wasn’t enough. He lost the race to Quan, who understood the in’s and out’s of Ranked Choice Voting and used them to her advantage.
Basically, having a strong support core is not enough to win a ranked choice voting election. To win, candidates must have both a strong support core AND a broad base of support. In highly polarized elections where the vote is divided, it can be anyone’s game.
But Kaplan and Quan saw ahead of the curve and focused on voters that would rank Kaplan and Quan first and second, knocking Perata down a spot or two. He did manage to keep his core support, but Kaplan and Quan knocked out his broad base of support, which cost him the election. Quan racked up 25% of the popular vote, but also won a lot of second place votes. Who says number two is the first loser? Now Quan is the Mayor of Oakland.
Makes me wonder what would happen in other cities like Alameda if Ranked Choice Voting was instituted. Maybe Marie Gilmore wouldn't be mayor after all...
Apparently Perata mentioned on the campaign trail “that he didn't really understand ranked-choice voting.” I’m betting Perata’s election strategists are feeling a bit sheepish right about now. I’m also betting we’re going to see some more legal action against Ranked Choice Voting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No legal action is expected to go anywhere. A case against San Francisco was dismissed on summary judgment. The sore losers are appealing, but well, that's because they're sore, not right!
ReplyDeleteGood to hear from you, Rose. Do you think, given the controversial results of the Oakland race, that that San Francisco summary judgment will hold?
ReplyDelete