people to vote yes on 131, but the state Dem party says vote no. Ranked choice voting is currently in use for various offices in many differents states, counties and municipalities, and to my knowledge Peter Thiel has no position on it yea or nay.
Using basic logic, I'd think orc-like billionaire lizard creatures like Thiel would actively dislike ranked choice voting, because again, it forces candidates to actually speak to kitchen table issues (as opposed to destructive Trump-like ideology) to get through the primaries. A billionaire parasite like Thiel would much rather just buy someone a seat, say, in the US Senate - which is where Vance has come from.
Why do you conflate Colorado Prop 131 with Project 2025? That doesn't make sense, and it doesn't scare me, because Republicans have been trying to scare people with socialism for decades, and it ain't workin' now. Sanders even moved the Overton window to Medicare for all Americans. I have actually read a lot of Project 2025, and those Heritage Foundation people didn't miss a beat. They don't want voter empowerment AT ALL, and that is what ranked choice voting is about.
Consider this - look at Kamala. She is running a flawless campaign. Seriously. They are doing great. But because she has had to create the 'permission' structure for Republicans to vote for her, she is moving more to the center. is that a horrible thing? No, I don't think so, because she will have to be President for ALL of us, even Republicans. And she will be sane, compassionate and competent. Kamala Harris for the people.
Will we see Medicare for all in our lifetimes? Probably not in mine, but never say never.
As to Prop 131, I am still voting YES on it because I hate that someone like Boebert gets elevated by the crazy GOP base and will likely win the seat after carpet bagging from the Western Slope to the Eastern Plains. The problem I have with it, you see, is that she is TOO EXTREME, and I firmly believe that ranked choice primaries would eliminate these extreme crazy-right people that ALWAYS WIN in my house district because it is gerrymandered that way. This is why the Hill gives Boebert a 99% chance of winning. And that just sucks. Even Ken Buck wasn't as cray-cray as she is. And he was a dick. I know because I would write him at least one letter a month, and would call his office sometimes several times a month on issues I care about. Like HEALTH CARE DEBT, student debt, childcare subsidies and so on. Now I will likely have to break in Boebert's staff to actual kitchen table issues.
In conclusion, I can live with an actual conservative, because as an economist I have wonk-level policy knowledge, and feel quite comfortable debating about the role of government. Problem is, we don't have those kind of conservatives in the Republican party now because of the primary system and how the crazy white-nationalist, Kluxer, Nazi, holy-roller base gets to pick who they run, and then they have to cheat to win because their policies are, well, crazy. If I must suffer a Republican in the District 4 US House seat, I would much prefer an actual sane conservative than a vapid know-nothing like Boebert.
I mean, I was at an event where Boebert spoke, and there were some heavy hitters (in local Colorado politics and economic development) there. Boebert was completely vapid. She could barely sling together a sentence, and then handed her grandbaby to a staffer, went out on the pation and vaped. We're all rolling our eyes. Geez. We have to rid the GOP of these crazies. Look at the bench strength the Democrats have - we saw that at the DNC. And now the actual conservative establishment Rs are now in the Harris tent, and while their policies still remain odious, at least they won't try and overthrow the government. Dick Cheney still belongs in prison for war crimes, though...
Anyway, enough of that. Best wishes!
= new reply since forum marked as read
