Angry, 400 lb. voter convinced town clerk Vermont’s not ready for Ranked Choice Voting (yet)

by Guy Page

Vernon Town Clerk Tim Arsenault’s encounter with an angry, confused 400 lb. voter over universal mailed in ballots informs his concern about S32, a Senate bill that would implement another big electoral change: Ranked Choice Voting.

Categories: Video

17 replies »

  1. I’ve got n idea. Let’s take something that’s not broken, and fix it ! (because it doesn’t work for me personally) We’ll make it possible to vote for multiple people, instead of just your favorite. Tell me again how this is better, and less complicated. I really don’t trust those who push this BS ! They have an agenda, and it’s NOT making voting easier, or less complicated. As Nancy Reagan said, Just Say No !

  2. Over 200 years of the same voting system and they have to keep changing it now just in the last 30 years?

    You should ask yourself why they’re changing it…

    Also take the time to look it up and try it out and remember that conservatives have a hard time fielding one per race…

    • “You should ask yourself why they’re changing it…”

      Uhm, spoiled elections? Like perhaps the 2014 Vermont gubernatorial/

  3. Just another gimmick to cheat with. I got an idea how about citizen voting, voter ID and hand filled out and hand counted ballots, along with same day voting (and counting of verified absentee votes).

  4. Rank Choice is definitely a way to rig the voting system as is mail in ballots for all. I moved to a rank choice state……it SUCKS!! vote is not vote…….Do NOT do it!!
    mail in ballots should ONLY be for those who have a good reason they cannot go vote or need to vote early…ie; military service, out of state, country, health issues…WORK,
    I received a ballot after being told would NOT be forwarded…….so I could have voted twice……..

  5. Good for this guy! I’d try the same but I’m just not willing to pack on that kinda weight in order to make the point. Not quite sure how or why his weight was relevant anyway, to be honest.

  6. Hay I’m in favor of RCV but I also know that they’re doing it wrong in single-winner elections. I just gotta paper about Burlington’s experience with what we called “IRV” back in 2009.
    One can get the published version free of cost:

    But I still think my submitted version is better:

    One page primer (talking points) on Precinct Summability

    Letter to Governor Scott

    Templates for plausible legislative language implementing Ranked-Choice Voting

    Partha Dasgupta and Eric Maskin 2004 Scientific American article: The Fairest Vote of All

    Here’s a couple o articles regarding the Alaska RCV election in August 2022 that suffered a similar majority failure:

    Anyway, most of the other RCV advocates hate my guts because I am calling out known and objective failures that they don’t want to face.

  7. Here’s what you want with IRV voting: 12 Shill candidates.

    Look, I know you DON’T want Ranked Voting, but if you get it, here’s what to do. Hire a dozen candidates who are kinda like the one you like. Let’s say you like a Republican. So, find a candidate to run for the “Conservative Party”, then the “Libertarian Party”, then the “Right to Life Party”, then the “Free Guns” Party and so on.

    When one by one, the tiny party candidates get knocked out of the box by scoring 3% or 5% of the vote, ALL their votes get turned over to the Republican, who can win with only 15% of the First place votes.

    Any Progessive wanting a system like this needs their heads examined. Which might not be a bad thing to begin with.

  8. A great number of citizens are asking questions and have the absolute right to ask questions. The trouble is the answers from the “selected” ones is to change up the process and the rules even more. They will never allow the Truth to come out, but come out it will and it has in many places. Their fear and desperation of being found out for what they have done is on display daily. Nothing can stop what is coming upon them. The process will be changed, but not to their liking and not to their advantage. Watch Europe!

  9. Tell me again why we need RCV? RCV benefits the Progressives, and they already run the state. Being so, what is wrong with the current system?

  10. Been in Vermont for almost 30 years. The number of wacky laws seem to increase every year therewith making life here more and more difficult. If nonsense
    like RCV is the best that our legislature can do, then perhaps we’d all be better off if we just canceled the damn thing (the legislature). We’d both save a lot of money and reduce our anxiety and heart attacks. For heaven’s sake, give us a break. We’ve already had enough insanity to sink the ship!

Leave a Reply