Alaska has a new voting system that may require a mathematical statistician to understand. It seems like a gaming platform with consequences of voting or not voting for “second choices” challenging to calculate. It seems like a way for incumbents with name recognition to have an implicit edge, and the ongoing, slow Alaska race for the U.S. Senate is an example of the corruption of the new system. The incumbent has an advantage in ranked choice voting. It seems like counting some votes twice.
The challenger Kelly Tshibaka took more than 43% of the vote in the state and nearly all Republican votes although she and Lisa Murkowski, initially appointed by her father the former senator and then Governor both claim to be Republicans. Murkowskiy took most Democrat votes and will get more support when the Democrat candidate is eliminated in voting counting as Murkowski was the second choice of the few Democrats that actually voted for their own party candidate. Murkowski votes Democrat on all important social issues and also is pro-global warming gas development through fossil fuels, and is female so she is the Democrat’s choice who runs as an independent or Republican. The state Republican party supported Tshibaka.
In an election the winner ought to be the candidate that gets the most votes plainly. The ranked choice system muddies that and leaves voters uncertain about how to calculate or game the system by careful picking second through fifth choices to help their own first choice win even though they hate the rest of the field. To not vote for alternate ranked choices in some way counts against one’s own first choice.
Plutocrats are converting democracy to plutonomy and corporatocracy by degrees. Apparently social media statistically bans far more conservative political posts than liberal to such an extent that they actually influence elections. Something like 20% of independent voters voted to the left in 2020 because of social media skewers to the left creating more left supporting content. *(the data are difficult to confirm)
In corrupting a Democracy ranked choice voting seems like a good tool to make it more difficult for outsiders ever to get elected. Not only is it too costly and selected by factors other than competence or suitability, now it is also muddy as votes count in lesser degrees for some in accordance with how they are ranked. It reminds me of U.S. Constitution categories for some classes of Americans before it was amended when some citizens counted less than others for population counting purposes of the states.