Treasure the days when stability at the polling place was rooted in “one man, one vote.” Instability is on the doorstep — we could soon have “one man, three or more votes.” It’s called ranked-choice voting. Get ready to hold your nose.

No more voting on your favorite candidate. From now on, you’ll be voting on “best to less” candidates. Yes, politicians requiring voter use of nose plugs.

Did you catch Tom Waddell’s column extolling ranked-choice voting simply because it was approved by “Maine voters.” Let’s be careful bestowing credit heaps on the same voters who enacted marijuana laws sans operating provisions and expanding health coverage to 70,000 Mainers, able-bodied, without a shred of funding to pay for it. Such legislation, passed by blindfolded voters, deserves a woodshed education.

Waddell touts ranked-choice voting because it will force politicians to say nice things about opponents, or else fear losing second-choice placement with voters. I fail to see value in a system that produces second-place politicians.

And what is this sudden campaign contention that says a “majority” winner is superior to a “plurality” winner? Where’s the evidence? Every dictator is a majority winner. Plurality to the rescue.

There’s plenty of talk on the street relating to this proposed voting system. A “no” vote on Question 1 on June 12 puts it on a back burner.

John Benoit


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

filed under: