Weighing Alaska’s electoral system
There was a sizable chunk of voters who cast their lot with Obama over Romney in 2012 and then went for Trump over Clinton in 2016. This was in consternation to various Democrats, I would find it an insult Obama said.
I am thinking this over with some comments section on conservative websites on ranked choice and the election of Peltola over Palin. The Republican split which put Peltola over both Palin and the Republican Begich in round one of vote tallying kept along in round two as Begich’s vote siphoned 50 – 29 over to Palin and Peltola. Or, the chunk of Begich voters who favored Peltola over Palin was sizable enough to drag her over the finish line. The complaint, their indictment on the new process, is that with 60 percent voting Republican, and look at the policies — Palin’s and Begich’s are much more aligned than Begich’s and Peltola’s. Sure. Yet Trump on down describes a whole mass of Republicans whose policies are mostly aligned with his as “RINO” s — so apparently there is difference enough, and Sarah Palin herself gave the game away by urging her voters not to pick a second choice — begging the question of why she would think Begich voters shouldn’t be free to reciprocate in kind.
Is this “small d” Democracy in action? I see that The Nation decrees it so, but their headline gives away that they do so at least in part by dent of outcome — “How Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system freed the majority of voters to elect pro-choice, pro-labor Democrat Mary Peltola”. Meanwhile, a different election with an outcome they did not like — a congressional primary race in Texas between Henry Cuellar and Jessica Cisneros, they decried as the Democratic Party machine stomping on democracy, even though the voters had every opportunity to follow through with Alexandria Ocasio Cortez campaigning for Cisneros but narrowly followed James Clyburn as campaigning for Cuellar instead.
On that, did the “ranked choice” even alter the equation of the damned election? At least in theory if presented with a ballot that has those two names — Sarah Palin (R) and Mary Peltola (D), the same 29 percent who cast Peltola over Palin should do so in that general election. And perhaps, under the long established system, the upset still would have happened. Or, in that small d democratic sense, should have happened, even if it wouldn’t. Or, perhaps what happens is that a sizable chunk of the Begich (R) — Peltola (D) vote stick with the (R) of Palin — the partisan and theoretically policy pull, never mind it is the half term governor who soured a lot of voters with a turn in political identity in her vice presidential campaign (and I have heard a number of Alaskans ask a “where the hell did this crap come from?” — whatever their opinions and misgivings before — in 2008) turned recurring reality star who hasn’t lived in the state all these years– they are stuck voting for — but can give her and that baggage a middle finger under the new system after casting their “R” vote by dropping her aside with ranked choice, thus ending up with a that lippant Peltola vote. Those Begich — Peltola votes are the swing votes in hypothetical alternate realities. Appeal to them accordingly.
Trying to lay outcome aside (it is certainly better that she not be in office), I do not have a clear answer on that split — personality comes into play — and think there probably isn’t a clear answer — just piles of gives and takes — too murky and ephemeral is the definition of “small d democracy”.