this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
898 points (97.9% liked)

You Should Know

38093 readers
1689 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

RCV trends: Four states ban RCV in 2025, bringing the number of states with bans to 15.

(Okay idk why it says 15 up here then later says 16, somebody on that site probably didn't update the title text)

As of April 30, five states had banned RCV in 2025, which brought the total number of states that prohibit RCV to 16.

  • Gov. Mark Gordon (Republican) signed HB 165 on March 18.
  • West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (Republican) signed SB 490 the March 19.
  • Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (Democrat) signed SB 6 into law on April 1.
  • North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong (Republican) signed HB 1297 on April 15.
  • Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Republican) signed HB 1706 which became law on April 17.

Six states banned RCV in 2024.

Why YSK: If you're a US-American, its time to pay attention to State and Local politics instead of solely on the Federal. There is a trend in conservative jurisdictions to stop progress in making elecoral systems more fair. Use this opportunity as a rallying-cry to pass Ranked-Choice Voting in progressive jurisdictions, and hopefully everyone else takes notes. Sometimes, all you need is a few states adopting a law to become the catalyst for it to become the model for the entire country, for better or for worse. Don't allow anti-RCV legislations to dominate, counter the propaganda with pro-RCV arguments. Time to turn the tide.

Edit: fixed formatting

Edit 2: Added in the map so you don't have to click the link:

collapsed inline media

See the pattern? πŸ€”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 120 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

Tl;dr

I was curious so I had to go look and see what states banned it. I was shocked, shocked I tell you to see the states that banned it are:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming

Edit to add:

collapsed inline media

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Does it also shock you that Iowa is on the short list to do the same?

https://www.billtrack50.com/billdetail/1848744

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nope. I live in Minnesota and I'm well aware of what I.O.W.A. stands for.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm curious what you got for I.O.W.A. I hate this place, so I love anything that bags on us.

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 17 points 2 days ago

Idiots out wandering around. Not everybody in the state is an idiot but the ones that are, are out wandering around.

[–] chickenf622@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 days ago

I've always known it as "Idiots Out Wandering Around"

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 2 days ago

For those non-USians reading this, the pattern is: states which tend to vote Republican and thus have majority Republican governance. So called "red states".

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 13 points 2 days ago (5 children)

You’d think it would be democrats worried about another Bernie Sanders coming along.

What is it the republicans are worried about with RCV?

[–] JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago

The left wing vote is split, so the Republicans can win just by getting the largest number of votes with first-past-the-post.

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 16 points 2 days ago

I don't know because they shouldn't be.

Republicans like Senator Tom Cotton and Donald Trump have garnered headlines for stating their opposition to ranked choice voting after election results didn’t turn out exactly as they hoped. Their preferred candidates, Sarah Palin in the House and Kelly Tshibaka in the Senate, didn’t win. Both are Republicans. So, they claim (loudly) that RCV is biased against Republicans or "rigged."

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 70 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Is anybody surprised that you could replace the orange with red and have a pretty accurate election map?

What are you guys scared of? Democracy?

[–] GuyFawkes@midwest.social 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In Kansas it surprises me that Kelly signed it; I’d be more inclined to believe that the Republican supermajorities pushed it past a veto.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago

It looks like it passed with a veto proof majority that probably included some democrats. Link

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 59 points 2 days ago (2 children)

In MO. Voted on it last year. The ballot was intentionally worded to be misleading.

It said each person can only cast one vote. Making it sound like it was to prevent people from voting twice even though that person as already not allowed.

So dumb.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 26 points 2 days ago

They just pulled that in the Ohio House this week. They have been calling it "One Person, One Vote" and are going to withhold state funds to any municipality that uses ranked choice voting. It passed our house 22-5 iirc

[–] gaja@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago

Missouri Amendment 7, Require Citizenship to Vote and Prohibit Ranked-Choice Voting Amendmen

[–] iglou@programming.dev 58 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Nothing screams "democracy" like explicitely banning a voting system

[–] nico198x@europe.pub 14 points 1 day ago (9 children)

well, to be fair, shitty electoral systems should be banned, like FPTP, because they aren't representative. what's happening here is sadly the opposite.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 54 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (8 children)

At what point is a democracy not a democracy any more?

[–] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 days ago

For the U.S., the decisive blow came with the Citizens United ruling, although it’s not unreasonable to suggest the refusal to punish Nixon during watergate signaled that the rule of law was merely a suggestion. That kicked off a whole cascade of political and legal maneuvering to get both the legislative and societal landscape into such a contortion that it would willingly hand away the entire nation to vulture-capitalists.

[–] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A better question would be "when was there ever been a true democracy?"

For me, there hasn't been. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't try. It means that we need to truly internalise that wealth and power will, if left unchecked, succeed in perverting it entirely. We need to be ever augmenting it, with that in mind, with a view to playing whack a mole with the interests of the 1% and keeping it working for the 99%.

I mean that won't work either. The rich and powerful will never allow us to simply vote away their ill beggoten wealth and power. However, at least people could say that they tried.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 40 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

This is democrats and Republicans not wanting people to vote for their candidate of choice because they have to constantly play the game of the lesser of two evils. They wanna keep power

[–] HighFructoseLowStand@lemm.ee 14 points 1 day ago (16 children)

Not even one state that has banned it is run by Democrats.

[–] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 9 points 1 day ago

Your right about that, it is a fair thing to point out. However, I will mention that the democratic party has a hostile past to 3rd parties where they would do things like suing them to get them off ballots.

Here is one example for reference: https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-lawsuits-voting-north-carolina-raleigh-48f1e61c1988c7083edcdc7bb1eace4a

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Americans complain about the two party system and do absolutely nothing to change that. It's like watching a soap opera but everyone's fell of the horse and lost their memory.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 37 points 2 days ago

It's almost like those in power make the laws that are used to elect those in power πŸ€”

[–] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In Colorado last year RCV was on the ballot as part of an initiative. It was shot down easily because both parties campaigned against it. Not sure what to do when the weight of all incumbents is thrown against something

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In Colorado, one of my wife's friends is what most people (I say this, knowing the Lemmy political scale is vastly different from most Americans) would consider super liberal. She's also very outspoken and politically active, so she has no problems telling everyone she knows how to vote on every issue.

Last election, we were at her house and she mentioned that she was against ranked choice voting. When I asked her why, she pointed to her voting guide provided by the Colorado Democratic Party. She just blindly accepts that because the party says it's bad, then it's bad.

After seeing that, it wasn't surprising to me when the proposition failed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Lol go to r/conservative and you'll see all those idiots having doublethink simultaneouly saying that they support term limits for congress and support for ranked-choice voting, yet continues to vote in conservatives that oppose the very policies they claim to support.

Its actually quite ridiculous. Republican legislators consistantly oppose raising the minimum wage or abortion, yet, the republican voters votes in favor of those policies, while simultaneously vote for the legislators that oppose them.

I'm just like... Why??? Why do y'all vote like this? πŸ€¦β€β™‚οΈ

I think we should just go the Swiss-route and do direct democracy; representatives don't even represent their constituents anymore.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think we should just go the Swiss-route and do direct democracy;

That's literally the Anarchy system. I.e Laws and no leaders.

As an Australian who has ranked choice (we call it preferential) it's not the panecea folks here seem to think it is to bring about the enlightenment.

I'm 58, have voted in every election from when I was eligible through to this year. We don't have ICE but we have Border Force and we routinely deport non citizens, we inspect digital devices at the border, we off shore legal refugees in internment camps, we have zero care for the enviorment and love penis shaped defence spending, we are a car dependent shit hole with few redeeming qualities.. It's ever been thus, Donad Horne oponed on this in the 1970s.

We don't have feedom of the press or freedom of speech, so often these things are unable to even be reported on at all and our most egregious atrocities have widespread support amongst the broader population. In that respect its not as big a divisor as. n the US as we're all arseholes :) We're happy to allow religious scumbags to discriminate against LGBQT folks, happy to have our privacy removed, are quite fond of fucking over our indigenous peoples and the wider enviorment and near zero concern for exestential issues like climate change. We're happy to shit over homeless people and have unaffordable housing and racism is broadly endemic.

We have never elected a government that i think is anything but objectively fucking horrible, we have our tongue firmly stuck up the US foreign policy asshole and follow them into every stupid dumb shit military action. We have had the occasionally decent poltican but then so does the US (Bernie etc) .

Like us, your people are broken and you're not going to cure what ails ya' with RCV.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)

We voted for it at the county level here in CA. That was back in 2020. San Diego county voted to use RCV, as did several other counties in CA. The county registrar of voters is refusing to change from FPTP, and is waiting to see how the lawsuits turn out.

Even if your state hasn't banned it, they will fight you tooth and nail not to change it.

[–] RaptorBenn@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The fact that Americans banned it, means it good for the people.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Cheems@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago

Ranked choice should be the standard

[–] GuyFawkes@midwest.social 22 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Can anyone explain to me why a BAN was even needed? If a State is FPTP that’s the way it is; why do they need to say a different way is not allowed? Especially because of that different way were to actually be viable enough to become law it would just be a one two step - repeal the old, then institute the new.

[–] throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

They don't want sub-divisions of the State (cities/towns) to implement RCV in their local elections. Probably to avoid the idea to spread. It like Democracy/Republicanism. When the French got rid of their monarchy, all the monarchs of nearby countries were afraid the sentinment would spread, same thing here.

Edit: spelling

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 15 points 2 days ago

The Ohio HoR just overwhelming voted to remove all state funding from any city that implements ranked choice voting. It threatens the parties in power, so they are both eager to stomp it out

[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The link gives some arguments. It's mostly stupid right wing claptrap.

Opponents of ranked-choice voting argue that it benefits voters with more time and information, leads to decreased voter confidence in elections, and disconnects voting from important issues and debates. Opponents of ranked-choice voting also argue that RCV winners do not necessarily represent the will of the voters.

It goes on to giving statements for those reasons from such respectable organizations as The Heritage Foundation, so do what you want with that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

Alaska passed it. The election results didn't go as expected. Everyone in one party (guess) freaked out and started passing bans nationwide.

They tried to repeal RCV in Alaska too, but it failed by a slim count ~~even after 100:1 repeal money advantage~~. They'll probably try again: https://alaskapublic.org/elections/2024-11-20/alaskas-ranked-choice-repeal-measure-fails-by-664-votes

Edit: misread the fundraising number.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ohio is trying to ban it this year.

[–] throwawayacc0430@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I get why Gen alpha use "Ohio" to describe something bad now

God damn Skibidi Ohio polititians with no rizz, no cap fr fr, voters with brainrot smh

(sorry for the use of Gen alpha brainrot language)

load more comments (5 replies)

Seems about right. This reinforces my reality. If something good happened to humanity, I might wonder if I somehow might be going mad.

[–] morgan_423@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (7 children)

First past the post voting is the sole issue that is keeping legitimately contending third parties off of our ballots.

Installing ranked choice voting (or one of its very close cousins) is the the number one reformation change that can be made to give the people their voices back. So of course, the powers that be are terrified of it... no surprises here.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] s38b35M5@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Mainer here. Its great, except that the governor's race is specifically exempted from RCV. May have something to do with GOP former governor LePage, but can't recall before my morning meds...

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There was a STRONG effort to ban (or at least end) RCV here in Alaska, and it failed, but barely. They even did the super misleading wording, too, in order to make it unclear if the measure banned RCV or supported it.

I was always so confused by the adamant support that was being shown by general people, though. Like, I get why both Dems and Republicans would be against it: they want to be the only two players in the game. But why any general people would want less choice is beyond me. And it's funny, because the staunchest proponents (at least where I am) were conservatives, when (again, where I live) RCV basically drove out the Democrats. There were Progressives, there were "centrists," there were Libertarians, and then there was Republican/MAGA. Dems didn't even get enough support to be on the ballot. So their hated Libs were wiped off the board entirely for being so ill-liked, but they want to get rid of that system? I just don't get it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] motor_spirit@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

absolutely shocked that southern states with the worst education and track history of the most oppressive laws would do this to their constituents

they've been nothing but whored-out welfare states the whole fucking time

[–] Bieren@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Don’t worry. Voting altogether will be next.

[–] bitwolf@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What is a ban going to do.

It just changes the language of the acceptance bill

Pre-empts local laws preventing sub-divisions of the State (Cities, Towns) from enacting their own election system that would use "ranking" as a method of determining candidates winning or losing.

Renaming the system will not bypass the ban.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 8 points 2 days ago

The whole entry is enlightening.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί