International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   New York City Elections (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=351951)

Kaylee 8th June 2021 06:01 PM

New York City Elections
 
Do we have enough members from New York City to have a thread on the city's June primary elections?,

In my district alone these are the offices that are going to be on the Democratic primary ballot:

Mayor (12 candidates)
Public Advocate ( 3)
Comptroller (10)
District Attorney (8)

This doesn't include the borough presidents (5 in NYC for each of the boroughs), city council elections, and civil court elections.

What may interest those who don't live in NYC is that 5 of the offices will have ranked choice voting for the first time -- up to 5 choices per office. Here's an example of how the board of elections explains ranked voting: Simple Ranked Vote Demo/


Early voting starts on the 12th and the last day of voting is on election day.

It can always be a challenge to decide who to vote for but with ranked voting instead of selecting 5 politicians for 5 offices, one can choose up to 23 politicians for 5 offices (one office only has 3 candidates running vs 5). I'm finding that especially challenging and I admit to only starting to learn about many of the candidates as I've been super busy this year. However, I've never been a fan of the idea of someone running for a significant office with no experience of having held any elected position - so that is making the winnowing process easier for me. But it's a little scary to see how many people in that category are running for mayor...

BobTheCoward 8th June 2021 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaylee (Post 13503129)
Do we have enough members from New York City to have a thread on the city's June primary elections?,

In my district alone these are the offices that are going to be on the Democratic primary ballot:

Mayor (12 candidates)
Public Advocate ( 3)
Comptroller (10)
District Attorney (8)

This doesn't include the borough presidents (5 in NYC for each of the boroughs), city council elections, and civil court elections.

What may interest those who don't live in NYC is that 5 of the offices will have ranked choice voting for the first time -- up to 5 choices per office. Here's an example of how the board of elections explains ranked voting: Simple Ranked Vote Demo/


Early voting starts on the 12th and the last day of voting is on election day.

It can always be a challenge to decide who to vote for but with ranked voting instead of selecting 5 politicians for 5 offices, one can choose up to 23 politicians for 5 offices (one office only has 3 candidates running vs 5). I'm finding that especially challenging and I admit to only starting to learn about many of the candidates as I've been super busy this year. However, I've never been a fan of the idea of someone running for a significant office with no experience of having held any elected position - so that is making the winnowing process easier for me. But it's a little scary to see how many people in that category are running for mayor...

Should you vote if you have so little knowledge about the candidates? How do you know if starting now is enough time to sufficiently inform yourself?

Stacyhs 8th June 2021 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 13503134)
Should you vote if you have so little knowledge about the candidates? How do you know if starting now is enough time to sufficiently inform yourself?

Oh, good lord.

Kaylee 8th June 2021 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 13503134)
Should you vote if you have so little knowledge about the candidates? How do you know if starting now is enough time to sufficiently inform yourself?

I think there's time if I use it wisely. At a minimum, I know enough to decide whether to vote for people who have held elected office for years, have a voting record, and have gone on record by various methods such as deciding what bills to sponsor.

How would you justify not trying at all?

BobTheCoward 8th June 2021 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaylee (Post 13503166)
I think there's time if I use it wisely. At a minimum, I know enough to decide whether to vote for people who have held elected office for years, have a voting record, and have gone on record by various methods such as deciding what bills to sponsor.

How would you justify not trying at all?

I have about four different takes to your question. I won't bother you with them and derail if you want this to focus on the specifics.

jrhowell 9th June 2021 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaylee (Post 13503129)
What may interest those who don't live in NYC is that 5 of the offices will have ranked choice voting for the first time -- up to 5 choices per office. Here's an example of how the board of elections explains ranked voting: Simple Ranked Vote Demo/

From the sample:

Quote:

Rank up to 5 choices.
Only rank one candidate per column
Don’t rank any candidate more than once
Three simple instructions. What could go wrong?

I'm thinking that there will be a significant number of spoiled ballots.

Kaylee 9th June 2021 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrhowell (Post 13503627)
From the sample:



Three simple instructions. What could go wrong?

I'm thinking that there will be a significant number of spoiled ballots.

Maybe. I'm wondering if that issue will be covered in the news.

For what it's worth I'm pretty most of the spoiled ballots will be for one or some positions but not the entire ballot. Let's say a voter breaks rule # 2 for the mayor's position, but does everything else correctly. Their ballot will have no selection registered for mayor and the rest of their ballot will be counted as marked.

Let's say a voter breaks rule #3 and casts their vote for the same person in all 5 ranks for mayor. The voting machine is programmed to count the vote cast for mayor in the first rank and disregard the choices for the remaining 4 ranks. This mistake won't prevent the machine from attempting to count the votes cast for the other positions.

Yeah, i think there will be some partially spoiled ballots but not that many completely spoiled ballots.

ETA - There are more instructions elsewhere on the web site such as making sure to fill in the entire circle for your choice and not to use Xs or checkmarks. Using checkmarks instead of filling in the circle for all of your choices would definitely spoil the entire ballot, but that is not a new rule in NYC elections.

As an aside, I resent being expected to cast up to 23 votes for 5 positions as I don't think there are that many good candidates and it will be a lot of work to thoughtfully make 23 real choices. But other than that, I'm looking forward to seeing how this works out and what the voters reactions to the experience will be. As far as I know, it will be the first time ranked voting is used in NYC for a political election.

mumblethrax 12th June 2021 03:27 AM

NYC mayoral elections are always a bit grim, but this one is especially so. At least Andrew Yang seems to have tanked his early lead.

The addition of ranked choice voting is interesting, but eliminating off-year elections and permitting non-citizen voting would probably be more meaningful democratic reforms. Turnout in 2017 was a dismal 18%, and I doubt it will be much higher this time.

BobTheCoward 12th June 2021 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mumblethrax (Post 13506229)
NYC mayoral elections are always a bit grim, but this one is especially so. At least Andrew Yang seems to have tanked his early lead.

The addition of ranked choice voting is interesting, but eliminating off-year elections and permitting non-citizen voting would probably be more meaningful democratic reforms. Turnout in 2017 was a dismal 18%, and I doubt it will be much higher this time.

I have trouble complaining about the off year election thing. Why is turnout lower? If people just don't care as much, I'm not clear why you want those same people to vote.

mumblethrax 12th June 2021 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 13506275)
I have trouble complaining about the off year election thing. Why is turnout lower?

Because it's an off-year election. Fewer high-profile races, less effort spent on broad turnout drives.

And this probably isn't a coincidence--the local party machine prefers it this way. They've resisted early voting reforms for decades for much the same reason.

In any case, I don't see any reason to accept the claim that I don't want the people who don't turn out to vote. It's premised on the long-debunked idea that non-voters are immutably disinterested.

BobTheCoward 12th June 2021 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mumblethrax (Post 13506297)
Because it's an off-year election. Fewer high-profile races, less effort spent on broad turnout drives.

And this probably isn't a coincidence--the local party machine prefers it this way. They've resisted early voting reforms for decades for much the same reason.

In any case, I don't see any reason to accept the claim that I don't want the people who don't turn out to vote. It's premised on the long-debunked idea that non-voters are immutably disinterested.

But why would you want the vote on Y to reflect the votes of people that wouldn't bother to vote for Y when Y is by itself?

mumblethrax 12th June 2021 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 13506304)
But why would you want the vote on Y to reflect the votes of people that wouldn't bother to vote for Y when Y is by itself?

Because people are affected by the outcome of elections irrespective of whether they vote. It's better when turnout is higher for the same reason it's better to have democratic elections in the first place--it legitimizes outcomes on the standard liberal self-government account. It's a bad situation that our current mayor was re-elected with something like 14% of the eligible vote, particularly when so many New Yorkers aren't eligible to vote.

Puppycow 23rd June 2021 01:34 AM

Adams has a sizable lead after chaotic New York primary

Well Andrew Yang won't be the next mayor of New York.

There's still some counting left because it's ranked choice voting and nobody got an absolute majority on the first ballot. However, Eric Adams appears to have a sizable lead.

Quote:

NEW YORK — Eric Adams rode an anti-crime message to a commanding lead in the crowded race to replace outgoing Mayor Bill de Blasio, ousting former presidential contender Andrew Yang and holding off nearly a dozen other Democrats.

But under New York’s new ranked-choice voting system, the election now heads into an instant runoff that could last for weeks and keep the Brooklyn borough president from officially claiming his party’s nomination.
An "instant" runoff that could last for weeks. ;)

And of course this is still just the primary, but most people seem to think that whoever wins the Democratic primary will go on to win the general election too.



Analysis: Crime is up sharply in New York City, so a "tough on crime" political message seems to be a winning message even among New York City Democratic Primary voters. Adams is a former police officer.

mumblethrax 23rd June 2021 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puppycow (Post 13516708)
And of course this is still just the primary, but most people seem to think that whoever wins the Democratic primary will go on to win the general election too.

Given that Curtis Sliwa won the Republican primary, I certainly hope so.

dudalb 23rd June 2021 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mumblethrax (Post 13517527)
Given that Curtis Sliwa won the Republican primary, I certainly hope so.

Given the Silwa thinks law enforcement should have the right to be judge, jury and executioner, I agree.
it is interesting the Silwa, who has made no bones about despising Trump, (one of the very few things I can say in his favor) was introduced by Giuliani. Maybe even Giuliani sees that Trump is not going to hold public office again.

MarkCorrigan 28th June 2021 03:41 PM

Silwa was running against a man who claimed that Trump won the 2020 election. I think either way the GOP needs to lose.

Stacyhs 28th June 2021 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puppycow (Post 13516708)
Adams has a sizable lead after chaotic New York primary

Well Andrew Yang won't be the next mayor of New York.

There's still some counting left because it's ranked choice voting and nobody got an absolute majority on the first ballot. However, Eric Adams appears to have a sizable lead.



An "instant" runoff that could last for weeks. ;)

And of course this is still just the primary, but most people seem to think that whoever wins the Democratic primary will go on to win the general election too.



Analysis: Crime is up sharply in New York City, so a "tough on crime" political message seems to be a winning message even among New York City Democratic Primary voters. Adams is a former police officer.


Tell that to Joecool who "just wondered" if the new mayor will prioritize elimination of police and jails.

dudalb 28th June 2021 04:07 PM

I got a feeling Yang did poorly because of a backlash feeling that maybe electing people, however sucessful in business they might be, have never held elective office or a government position to a high, leadership position, might not be a good idea...

Norman Alexander 28th June 2021 08:25 PM

Why does this type of election need to take "weeks" to count? We have this here in Australia, and it can be done in hours, in time for trends to be on the evening news.

mumblethrax 28th June 2021 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13521924)
I got a feeling Yang did poorly because of a backlash feeling that maybe electing people, however sucessful in business they might be, have never held elective office or a government position to a high, leadership position, might not be a good idea...

Probably had more to do with him putting his foot in his mouth three times a day.

Donal 29th June 2021 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13522120)
Why does this type of election need to take "weeks" to count? We have this here in Australia, and it can be done in hours, in time for trends to be on the evening news.

I don't know how litigious Australia is, but here in Freedomland, everything needs a healthy dose of CYA. Also, this is the first time it is being run in NYC. For some odd reason, they couldn't just go off of what Maine has already done.

dudalb 29th June 2021 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mumblethrax (Post 13522141)
Probably had more to do with him putting his foot in his mouth three times a day.

Yes, that also. But then, that might have added to a "not ready for the jpb' image.
I honestly think that playing the "I am an outsider who never held a responsible position in Government and therfore I deserve a top spot" card is going to be very hard after Trump.

Norman Alexander 29th June 2021 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donal (Post 13522574)
I don't know how litigious Australia is, but here in Freedomland, everything needs a healthy dose of CYA.

OK. So what's the likely problem? Our voting is on paper ballots counted by hand. Ancient and slow technology. We also have official scrutineers, observers in the USA, I think, hanging on every vote. And yet it can be done officially and accurately in hours. Have they not run training and practices beforehand for the poll workers?

Quote:

Also, this is the first time it is being run in NYC. For some odd reason, they couldn't just go off of what Maine has already done.
What do they do in Maine?

Mumbles 29th June 2021 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13522120)
Why does this type of election need to take "weeks" to count? We have this here in Australia, and it can be done in hours, in time for trends to be on the evening news.

Simply put, NYC’s elections board…well, they suck. They’ve sucked for a long time.

I wasn’t going to speak on this election, since NYC usually picks some goofball anyway, but there’s your answer.

dudalb 29th June 2021 04:19 PM

The whole electiion process for NYC Mayor seems incredibly convuluted.
Bring back Tammany Hall.

Stacyhs 29th June 2021 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13522955)
The whole electiion process for NYC Mayor seems incredibly convuluted.
Bring back Tammany Hall.

The GOP is trying. And doing a bang up job.

Norman Alexander 29th June 2021 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mumbles (Post 13522942)
Simply put, NYC’s elections board…well, they suck. They’ve sucked for a long time.

I wasn’t going to speak on this election, since NYC usually picks some goofball anyway, but there’s your answer.

Let me get this right...

There's no permanent official body of some sort charged with overseeing NY state and city elections?

mumblethrax 30th June 2021 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13523165)
Let me get this right...

There's no permanent official body of some sort charged with overseeing NY state and city elections?

I believe Mumbles was referring to the mayor in your highlight there.

NYC does have a permanent official electoral body--the NYC Board of Elections. They generally suck at administering elections, however.

In support of this statement:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/29/n...gtype=Homepage

malbui 30th June 2021 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13517546)
Given the Silwa thinks law enforcement should have the right to be judge, jury and executioner, I agree.

Well, given that NYC was supposed to be part of Mega-City 1 by the end of this century he's only getting ahead of the curve there.

Norman Alexander 30th June 2021 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mumblethrax (Post 13523222)
I believe Mumbles was referring to the mayor in your highlight there.

NYC does have a permanent official electoral body--the NYC Board of Elections. They generally suck at administering elections, however.

In support of this statement:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/29/n...gtype=Homepage

Paywalled for me.

But i take it someone said it was shambolic?

mumblethrax 30th June 2021 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13523235)
Paywalled for me.

But i take it someone said it was shambolic?

Quote:

Then, around 10:30 p.m., the board finally released a statement, explaining that it had failed to remove sample ballot images used to test its ranked-choice voting software. When the board ran the program, it counted “both test and election night results, producing approximately 135,000 additional records,” the statement said. The ranked-choice numbers, it said, would be tabulated again.
Even after taking a week to release the preliminary ranked choice results, a giant error went undetected.

In general, the problem is that a) the way we run electoral boards/commissions/whatever in the US is stupid--we go for "bipartisan" rather than independent and b) in NYC in particular, the board of elections is a mess of political patronage and incompetence. Dudalb says "bring back Tammany Hall", but this is a direct consequence of Tammany Hall--critical jobs handed out as do-nothing favors to political supporters and relatives.

Hopefully this is a big enough scandal to finally clean house at the BoE. Maybe.

dudalb 30th June 2021 12:19 PM

I see some people here seem to be pretty weak in the humor department.

dudalb 30th June 2021 02:16 PM

Newest tactic by the Trumpers:Pointing at NYC's election problems and saying this smehow proves the November election was stolen.

BrooklynBaby 30th June 2021 06:11 PM

Well, a law and order candidate finished first, so they had to do something.

Puppycow 30th June 2021 06:20 PM

https://twitter.com/BOENYC


So Adams won in the end but it was closer than it seemed after the first round.

There was also apparently a snafu where pre-election test ballots were not purged from the system, resulting in the test ballots initially being included in the results. I think that has been rectified.

If you follow the link in the pinned tweet you can see how all 9 rounds of elimination went and how the vote totals changed each time. It took Adams until the final round to get over 50%.

Norman Alexander 30th June 2021 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby (Post 13523982)
Well, a law and order candidate finished first, so they had to do something.

...which was what? Count the votes according to the rules? Like they did last year?

Norman Alexander 30th June 2021 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mumblethrax (Post 13523237)
Even after taking a week to release the preliminary ranked choice results, a giant error went undetected.

In general, the problem is that a) the way we run electoral boards/commissions/whatever in the US is stupid--we go for "bipartisan" rather than independent and b) in NYC in particular, the board of elections is a mess of political patronage and incompetence. Dudalb says "bring back Tammany Hall", but this is a direct consequence of Tammany Hall--critical jobs handed out as do-nothing favors to political supporters and relatives.

Hopefully this is a big enough scandal to finally clean house at the BoE. Maybe.

Yeah, that does indeed sound pretty shambolic. :)

I am surprised that an electoral commission is considered partisan, or even involved in any political party, in any way. Surely it should be a permanently employed group of independent professionals, who are fully trained in the business of running an election and tallying votes accurately according to the extant rules, and can demonstrate openly that it has been done so.

Stacyhs 30th June 2021 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby (Post 13523982)
Well, a law and order candidate finished first, so they had to do something.

Hmmm...now he's a "law and order candidate"? I thought he was going to eliminate police and jails. Make up your mind.

Donal 1st July 2021 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13522821)
OK. So what's the likely problem?

Machine politics and cronyism.

Quote:

Our voting is on paper ballots counted by hand. Ancient and slow technology. We also have official scrutineers, observers in the USA, I think, hanging on every vote. And yet it can be done officially and accurately in hours. Have they not run training and practices beforehand for the poll workers?
See above. There's little interest in changing how things are done since it will likely cost the entrenched powers time and energy to rig a new system in their favor. The irony is voters seemingly had no issue with Ranked Choice Voting itself and are just given more motivation to get rid of the old guard.

Quote:

What do they do in Maine?
A better job than NYC.

BrooklynBaby 1st July 2021 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander (Post 13524013)
...which was what? Count the votes according to the rules? Like they did last year?

They "found" 135,000 test ballots had been included somehow so those were supposedly subtracted and Adams' lead went from significant to slim after the requisite ranked choice number crunching. Now they need to add over 100k absentee ballots.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.