While technically a majority, 51 percent, were in favor of the staggered voting referendum, it is not a resounding excitement, as you make it appear.
Your June 8 editorial (“Our View: Ranked-choice voters should not be forgotten“) uses mostly demagoguery in hyping the referendum as a rout. But what is glaringly absent from the editorial is the reason why the concept is virtually equally not accepted is that we don’t want second choice: We want who we want, or no one. Most sports fans won’t watch the playoffs if their team doesn’t get in; at least less inspired to do so if they do watch an alternate match.
The Portland Press Herald does a disservice to readers by leaving out or masking that ranked-choice voting installs the same either-gruel-or-porridge party and gerrymandering’s answer to Paul LePage and Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the Press Herald’s endorsement of the “fix” gladly accepts corporate advertisement money. But ranked-choice voting is a double-edged sword.
William Capistran
Kennebunkport
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.