Ranked Choice Voting/Open Primary – Ballot Question 3 exposed in detail

By Jim Marchant

On November 5th voters in Nevada will decide whether Ranked Choice Voting and Open Primary becomes law in Nevada.

If a majority of Nevada voters vote Yes for Ballot Question 3, it will be a disaster for Nevada. It could be the last nail in the coffin that will ensure that Nevada officially becomes as politically Blue as California. It will also make it almost impossible for any moderate or conservative candidate to be elected in Nevada again. Just like California now.

Voting YES on Ballot 3 will require the continued use of Voting Machines!

Most American voters believe and are aware that voting machines have been used to manipulate our elections and select our representatives since we began using them. This Ballot Question 3 will ensure that electronic voting machines will, by law, be required in all future elections.

Who is backing the Ballot 3 Question? Follow the Money

Ballot 3 is financed and backed by Communist and Anti-American organizations and people like George Soros and the World Economic Forum and many PACs they sponsor. If you don’t know, these people and groups hate the United States and are not America First. Why are they so interested in this Ballot Question 3 becoming law in Nevada? It makes it easier for them to select who represents us in all political offices throughout the state of Nevada.

Ballot Question 3 will cost Nevadans millions of taxpayer dollars to implement

This is an expensive solution being pushed by out-of-state special interests to fix a problem that doesn’t exist in our state.

These are the main reasons why you should vote NO on Ballot Question 3.

What is Ranked Choice Voting?

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) — Unlike traditional voting systems, where voters select only one candidate, RCV allows individuals to rank candidates in order of preference. This method.

How Ranked Choice Voting Works

1. Ranking Candidates: When voters go to the polls, they receive a ballot where they can list their preferred candidates from first choice to last. For example, if there are five candidates, a voter might rank them as follows: 1) Candidate A, 2) Candidate B, 3) Candidate C, 4) Candidate D, and 5) Candidate E. This allows voters to express preferences for multiple candidates rather than being restricted to a single choice.

2. Initial Vote Count: After the polls close, election officials count the first-choice votes for each candidate. If any candidate receives more than 50 percent of these first-choice votes, they are declared the winner. This majority requirement ensures that the winning candidate has significant support from the electorate.

3. Elimination Process: If no candidate achieves a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated from the race. Voters who had selected this candidate as their first choice will have their votes transferred to their next preferred candidate, as indicated on their ballots. This process allows for a more nuanced representation of voter preferences.

4. Redistribution of Votes: The votes are then recounted, incorporating the redistributed votes from the eliminated candidate. If a candidate now surpasses the 50 percent threshold, they are declared the winner. If not, the elimination and redistribution process continues, with the next candidate with the fewest votes being eliminated until a candidate receives a majority.

5. Final Outcome: This iterative process continues until one candidate emerges with a majority of votes. The final result reflects a consensus candidate.

Challenges and Considerations

Some voters may be unfamiliar with the ranking process, leading to confusion or errors on ballots. Additionally, the counting process can be more complex and time-consuming compared to traditional voting methods. Education and outreach efforts are essential to ensure that voters understand how to use RCV effectively.

If this ballot question passes, it will create a complicated new ranked-choice voting system that requires voters to learn about five candidates and then rank their top five choices, which will make casting your ballot take much longer, it will lead to increased errors and thousands of voters not having their voices heard. In states that have tried it, this ranked-choice system has resulted in up to five times as many ballots being thrown out because of errors — resulting in thousands of voters being silenced. And in close races, it often takes weeks to determine the winner, leading many voters to question the validity of the results. It would undermine our long established principles of voting. The idea “one person, one vote” is at the core of free and fair elections in America, but Ballot Question 3 would undermine that basic principle. When voters only rank one candidate and their candidate does not win outright, their vote is thrown out for subsequent rounds, while those who rank more than one candidate get their votes counted over and over.

Modifying our Constitution should not be altered when basic laws like this can easily be handled through the normal legislative process. Our state Constitution is no place to experiment with new ideas and schemes. Once passed, it is nearly impossible to change.

Open Primary

An open primary is a type of primary election where voters do not have to formally affiliate with a political party in advance in order to vote in its primary. In some cases, voters can declare their affiliation with a party at the polls on the day of the primary, even if those voters were previously affiliated with a different party.

Why should you be against Open Primary?

Voters NOT in your political party can determine who wins the Primary of your party.

For example, Uni-Party Member and RINO Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina continues to stay in office because South Carolina has an Open Primary law in place and he arranges for Democrats to vote for him in the Primary election to make sure he always wins.

In conclusion, Nevadans should reject Ranked Choice Voting and Open Primary. Vote NO on Ballot Question 3!

*

About Jim Marchant — President Donald Trump describes Jim Marchant as a “Legendary Businessman.” As a businessman, he was tired of the government punishing job creators so Jim decided to take matters into his own hands, he ran and defeated a tax-raising moderate/liberal Republican in the Nevada Assembly District 37 in 2016. While in the Nevada Assembly, he fought against the Establishment in both parties for lower taxes, less burdensome regulations, gun rights, and a more transparent government. He was ranked the top conservative legislator with conservative groups such as American Conservative Union and Nevada Policy Research Institute. He can be reached at jcm9079@gmail.com