Eric Adams will win Democratic primary for NYC mayor, CNN projects

[Gefn]

(CNN) — Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams will win the Democratic primary for New York City mayor, CNN projects.

Adams won 50.5% of the reallocated vote in data released Tuesday by the city's board of elections. The release included all ballots from in-person early and Election Day voters, as well as the vast majority of the almost 126,000 Democratic absentee ballots returned.

CNN projects the remaining uncounted ballots won't be enough for any of the other candidates to catch Adams.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/06/politics/nyc-mayoral-results/index.html

[Gefn]

This is the person running against Curtis Silwa in November for mayor.

[PeteS in CA]

If Adams walks his talk, NYC has a choice between two candidates criminals will hate.

[Fishrrman]

"Adams won 50.5% of the reallocated vote in data released Tuesday by the city's board of elections."

"Re-allocated" votes?
What in heck are those supposed to be?

Adams actually won something like 31% of the actual votes cast.
See this report, posted 6/23:
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,440778.msg2449879.html#msg2449879

Once again, I ask you:
How does 31% of "the vote" become 50.5% of "the vote" ??

If there is any "voting process" that MUST be banned in order for the Republic to survive, it's "ranked choice" voting.

If no one achieves a majority on election day, have a "first runoff" (top 3 vote-getters).
If that doesn't produce a majority, then have a "second runoff" of the top 2 vote-getters.

But "ranked choice" with "re-allocated" votes?
I'll let Josef Stalin say it:
"It isn't important who votes, but who counts the votes"

[Kamaji]

"Adams won 50.5% of the reallocated vote in data released Tuesday by the city's board of elections."

"Re-allocated" votes?
What in heck are those supposed to be?

Adams actually won something like 31% of the actual votes cast.
See this report, posted 6/23:
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,440778.msg2449879.html#msg2449879

Once again, I ask you:
How does 31% of "the vote" become 50.5% of "the vote" ??

If there is any "voting process" that MUST be banned in order for the Republic to survive, it's "ranked choice" voting.

If no one achieves a majority on election day, have a "first runoff" (top 3 vote-getters).
If that doesn't produce a majority, then have a "second runoff" of the top 2 vote-getters.

But "ranked choice" with "re-allocated" votes?
I'll let Josef Stalin say it:
"It isn't important who votes, but who counts the votes"

Because NYC is using ranked-choice voting for the first time (as opposed to the traditional, old-school methods of election fraud the democrat party is so well-versed in).  As part of that process, votes that went to the lowest-placed candidate are reallocated to other candidates based on the voters' ranked preferences - those votes are the ones that are "reallocated".  The process repeats until one candidate achieves a majority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_United_States

[AARguy]

"Reallocated votes"?? Huh? Oh... I get it. The system is now so complex that no one can understand it. The stage is now set for the "Deep State" to win no matter what. (The Deep State has also been known as SMERSH, SPECTRE, THRUSH and KAOS.)

America is done.

[Gefn]

Wasn’t KAOS the company that Maxwell Smart worked for?

Still and all, this will be one interesting election in November. 

[Kamaji]

"Reallocated votes"?? Huh? Oh... I get it. The system is now so complex that no one can understand it. The stage is now set for the "Deep State" to win no matter what. (The Deep State has also been known as SMERSH, SPECTRE, THRUSH and KAOS.)

America is done.

It's not that difficult to understand.  Ranked-choice voting systems are not complete novelties.

[Wingnut]

Wasn’t KAOS the company that Maxwell Smart worked for?

Still and all, this will be one interesting election in November. 

Would you believe....
That was CONTROL.  Bernie Kopell was with KAOS.

Missed it by this much!

[Gefn]

Would you believe....
That was CONTROL.  Bernie Kopell was with KAOS.

Missed it by this much!

I remember this show when I was little I liked his shoe phone.

Thanks @Wingnut

[Fishrrman]

kamaji wrote:
"It's not that difficult to understand.  Ranked-choice voting systems are not complete novelties."

NO.

Any "voting system" that takes an actual vote cast tally of about 31% (what Adams actually received) and "re-allocates" it to over 50% is a violation of the basic principle of "one man, one vote".

It's a carefully contrived distortion of everything that (as Americans) we have been taught that "voting" is supposed to be about.
Aside:
THAT'S why they wanted it... to contrive "wins" out of losses, and to enable candidates who might otherwise have not received a majority of votes cast to "win". [edited for clarity]

"Novelty" or not, this is the most dangerous threat to our election system yet.

[Kamaji]

kamaji wrote:
"It's not that difficult to understand.  Ranked-choice voting systems are not complete novelties."

NO.

Any "voting system" that takes an actual vote cast tally of about 31% (what Adams actually received) and "re-allocates" it to over 50% is a violation of the basic principle of "one man, one vote".

It's a carefully contrived distortion of everything that (as Americans) we have been taught that "voting" is supposed to be about.
Aside:
THAT'S why they wanted it... to contrive "wins" out of losses, and to enable minority candidates who might otherwise receive a majority of votes cast to "win".

"Novelty" or not, this is the most dangerous threat to our election system yet.

No, it's not.  It's a way of ensuring that there is a means of finding out the candidate that a majority would support if their first choice was not running, without forcing the candidates to be limited to only two in the first place, and without having to go through endless reballoting.

One should not have a knee-jerk reaction to the rhetorical use of the word "reallocate" and should think through the actual voting system in place.

[PeteS in CA]

"Ranked-choice voting" replaces run-offs with manipulable "re-assignment" that happens out of sight of poll watchers. If proposed in California I will vote against it.

[Cyber Liberty]

No, it's not.  It's a way of ensuring that there is a means of finding out the candidate that a majority would support if their first choice was not running, without forcing the candidates to be limited to only two in the first place, and without having to go through endless reballoting.

One should not have a knee-jerk reaction to the rhetorical use of the word "reallocate" and should think through the actual voting system in place.

And it's still better than the Jungle Primaries of CA and LA.  But ideally I prefer something that doesn't require a flow chart for the LIVs to understand. 

[AARguy]

Everyone eligible votes. The candidate with the most votes wins. Anything else is manipulation by someone for some nefarious purpose.