ANTI GUN Don Perata former State Senate Pro

[Mikeb]

Perata is not going away - he is too much of a publicity whore to do that!
I really despise that guy, but would have preferred him as mayor of Oaktown. Oakland is a cesspool and Don is the perfect guy to be at the helm of that dung heap - and he can't do much widespread damage as mayor of Oakland.

I expect him to end up being appointed by Gov. Jerry to some cushy commission or board for awhile and then he will pop up, hopefully where he can't do any damage.

Easy for you to say, you don't live in this dung heap.
Mike

[Skidmark]

The whole instant run off was a farce. My wife was telling me that about 18,000 votes were note counted because they didn't vote for the top three candidates. In a real run off, who would those 18,000 people have actually voted for.

It's so unfair that the voters in Oakland had this arcane system shoved down their throats! They should at least have had a chance to VOTE on whether to adopt such a system...

[Glock22Fan]

Perata did not "actually" win. If he had amassed 50% plus one of the vote, in voter's first choices, he would have been declared the winner, and new Mayor. But his initial catch was well below 50%, and so the Ranked Choice Voting provided a means of holding an instant runoff election. After several rounds, Quan achieved more than 50% of the votes, and "actually" won the election. Perfectly logical system, which is denounced primarily by old-school politicians (like Willie Brown) who don't like the power it takes away from them in runoff elections.

This is known as the "Single transferable vote" in England, and avoids the situation we've seen far too often in this election where those of us who vote for a no-hoper gets castigated for wasting their vote. In a transferable vote system, once the no-hoper is ruled out, your next choice gets your vote. Hence you can vote your conscience but still make an "evil blocking" vote.

There's a lot to be said for it, but very few politicians like it.

[uyoga]

I thought she was more anti than Perata. Am I wrong?

Can anyone be more anti that Perata?

[1JimMarch]

Rank choice voting is actually quite common. I thought the choice between Obama and McCain was extremely rank.

ahem. Sorry.

On a lighter note:

[N6ATF]

Aren't CCW apps and any attachments under penalty of perjury? Oh, crap, I forgot, if you're a victim disarming traitor you will never be prosecuted for anything.

[bandook]

The whole instant run off was a farce. My wife was telling me that about 18,000 votes were note counted because they didn't vote for the top three candidates. In a real run off, who would those 18,000 people have actually voted for.

This means that they didn't pick Perata/Quan as any of their 3 choices.

Given that they were so against these 2 candidates, most probably wouldn't have voted at all in a run-off.

[bandook]

Actually it isn't. Let's say that he received 49% and Quan had 30%. The "ranking" thing goes live, but only 10% of the people who didn't "vote" for Perata voted for him as the second choice. However, 50% don't know who Quan is and randomly voted for her.

Guess who your new mayor is?

The votes should have stayed for "first choice" with some sort of ranking similar to hockey: A "win" is 2 points, a "tie" is 1 point and a loss is zero.

First choice is 5, second is 3, third is 1...Not all equally weighted. A "she's not as good as Perata, but I'd vote for her second" isn't exactly the same as
"I want her for mayor". She should have only won if she had a LANDSLIDE more 1st PLUS 2nd votes than the guy who won the majority of ACTUAL votes.

That being said, I'm glad that I don't live in Oakland. I suspect that voting for "none of the above" wouldn't have resulted in their leaving the seat vacant?

This system ONLY works if EVERYONE understands precisely how it works. If you ONLY want choice 1 you vote for NO ONE else. By voting for a first, a second and a third, you could literally end up voting AGAINST your first choice and FOR the "also ran" without even knowing it.

First, if someone got 50% of the vote out of a field of 11 candidates, it is not 'random'.

Second, I think you misunderstand the ranked choice voting. It isn't First Place + Second place + 3rd place votes to see who comes up with the most. The person with the least amount of votes is eliminated and their second choice votes are then counted as first place votes.

E.g. Joe votes for
1st Place - Tuman
2nd place - Kaplan
3rd Place - Quan

Jill ranks her votes for
Perata, Quan, Kaplan

Given that Perata/Quan were the final two, Quan will never get Jill's vote as that vote has been prioritized to Perata.

But Joe's vote goes through the ranked choice process.
Once Tuman is eliminated (as the least vote getter of the remaining candidates),his vote drops into Kaplan's bucket.

Once Kaplan's vote is eliminated (because she was the 3rd of the 3 candidates left standing after elimination) Joe's vote will go to Quan

In your scenario, Perata would have won unless > 90% of the second place vote was stuck behind Quan (again - can't call that 'random') - in which case those people clearly stated that they prefer Quan over Perata.

This is quite complicated in its mathematical explanation but very simple to understand in plain English.

Here is what Joe said in his ranked choice vote;
I want Tuman to be Mayor, but if he doesn't get enough votes, then I want Kaplan to be Mayor, and if she too doesn't have enough votes to be Mayor, then I want Quan to be Mayor.

I'd love to have this kind of ranked choice for state/federal elections as well. If we had a ranked-choice open primary (or even ranked choice closed primary), IMO, there would be farewell parties for Boxer going on about now.

[liberty08]

The Don unemployed, that's something to be happy about. Quan for mayor not so much. I hated the rank voting thing. I could find one guy an the ballot that I didn't feel to bad about voting for, but three? good luck.
Quan lost me when she got mugged and was saying something like, " Oh, he's probably just unemployed and trying to take care of his family."
But, Barbara Lee got 87% in her race...
There is no hope for Oakland.
Mike

I don't believe he is unemployed and still works as a lobbyist for the prison guard union in California. It's perhaps just a front for his shady finances and business dealings.