Having read Ann Donnelly’s opinion about ranked choice voting I am struck by the idea that she does not understand it well (“Ranked choice voting would burden voters,” Local View, March 2).
Is it a lack of imagination that impedes this? After wandering around in how things stand in the state of Washington, she ignores the fact that it takes no more work for a voter to analyze the field of candidates and prioritize their vote than to analyze the field and make a single choice. The RCV mechanism does not mean one must prioritize. You can still vote for one candidate or a multiplicity.
In trying out differing scenarios that advantage Republicans, Donnelly has proven that it is power she seeks rather than the justice of democracy. Why would the Democrat have won in the case she cites? Could it be that one of the Republican candidates was too extreme for the constituency to win the votes from the other Republican?
There are technologies that solve the counting of votes and it is less expensive than the current system because it only takes one election rather than a primary and a final vote.
