Wikipedia photo.

Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th President of the United States, died on this day 25 years ago, April 22, 1994.

The following video was posted by the Richard Nixon Foundation on the occasion of the anniversary.

Life Magazine, Nov. 15, 1968.

Fifty years ago today, November 5, 1968, Richard Milhous Nixon was elected the 37th President of the United States.

Wikipedia image.

As explained below, there are three things to remember about ranked voting:

• Vote for as many candidates as you have choices, as long as some of them are less objectionable than others.
• All other things being equal, vote for the less popular candidate before you vote for the more popular candidate.
• Never vote for the same person more than once.

Both Minneapolis and St. Paul will be using “ranked voting” in the mayoral election this year. There is no primary election, and in St. Paul, there are 10 candidates running in the general election. You are allowed to vote for your top six choices. In other words, there are six different elections you can vote for.  Minneapolis has similar numbers.  You will vote for your first choice, and that is one election. Then, you will vote for your second choice, and that appears on the ballot as an entirely different race. This continues through your sixth choice. You can make any number of choices, between zero and six. Minneapolis has a similar number of candidates and choices.

As an election judge, I am allowed to explain the basic mechanics of voting, but I am limited in what I am allowed to explain. In particular, I am not allowed to explain to voters anything that might be perceived as “strategy” in using your six votes. So as a citizen, let me explain a bit about strategy.

A winner will generally not be selected unless that person has a majority (defined as 50% plus one vote). At first, the votes will be counted as usual. On election night, you will see the name of the candidate who won the most votes as first choice. If that person has a majority (50% plus one vote), then that candidate will be the winner. But it is extremely unlikely this will happen. Chances are, none of the candidates will receive more than 50%. Therefore, vote counting will continue on Thursday morning.

On Thursday morning, the second round will begin. One candidate (the one receiving the least votes) will be eliminated. If you voted for anyone else, then your vote will not change. Your first choice will remain your vote.

Election judges (which will include me) will then remove the ballots of the people who voted for the eliminated candidate. We will look at the second choice, but only on those ballots. Then, we will place those ballots in with the original ballots for that candidate.

We will then count the ballots a second time. If someone now has a majority, then that candidate will win. If no candidate has a majority (which is still extremely likely), then the counting will move to the thrid round. Again, one candidate will be eliminated. All of that candidate’s votes (which might have been the voter’s first or second choice) will be removed. We will then look at the next choice on those ballots (which might be the second choice or third choice), and add those ballots to the count for that candidate.

This process will continue, probably several times, until some candidate has a majority. It is likely that the winner will not be known until Saturday, after several rounds of counting have been done.

We can argue all day about whether this is a good system or a bad system. But that doesn’t matter. If you live in Minneapolis or St. Paul, this is the system you need to deal with. And if you want the maximum impact from your vote, then you need to think about strategy.

First of all, if you believe that some of the candidates are worse than other candidates, then you should take advantage of your ranked voting to make sure that the person you do not like is defeated. In other words, if there are evil candidates and lesser evil candidates, then it is in your best interest to vote for the lesser evils at some point in the voting.

If you vote for only one candidate, then there is a 9/10 chance that your candidate will be eliminated. Once your preferred candidate is eliminated, then only your other ranked choices will prevent the worst candidate from being elected.

In other words, if you learn on Saturday that candidate X, whom you hate, has been elected, and that even candidate Y would have been better, then it’s your fault if you failed to vote for candidate Y. Your failure to vote for candidate Y, even though you had the opportunity, meant that the even worse candidate, X, was elected.

Therefore, if, in your opinion, six candidates are better than the other four, then you should vote for all six of those candidates. If you fail to do so, then you are responsible for one of those four bad candidates winning. Please do not blame others if one of those four wins, because by not voting all of your choices, you are responsible. So at the very least, you need to look at all ten candidates and decide which four you want the least. Then, vote for the other six, in your order of preference, even if you have to hold your nose to vote for some of them.

If there is more than one candidate whom you prefer approximately the same amount, then there is another consideration. One candidate will be eliminated after the first round. If you vote for that candidate as your second choice, then your vote will not count.

This is important to remember, because there might be some candidate you really like, but you do not believe that candidate has a very good chance of winning. If that is the case, then you should vote for that candidate as one of your first choices, rather than as one of your last choices.

Let’s say, for example, that you like candidate A, but you don’t think he or she has a very good chance of winning. You like candidate B about as well, but you think they have a better chance of winning.

In this case, your best strategy is to vote for candidate A as your first choice, and candidate B as your second choice. TO see why, let’s look at how your one vote could make a difference.

Let’s say that in the first round, you vote for candidate A.  Candidate B, who you also like, failed to get a majority by a single vote. If you had voted for B, then B would have won. Your vote cost that candidate the election–but only in the first round.

But no matter how many rounds the election goes, that candidate will eventually win, because you voted for them. Eventually, your other candidates will be eliminated. And eventually, your one vote will be cast in favor of candidate B. Since candidate B lost the first round by only one vote–your vote, it turns out–it is impossible for any other candidate to win. Since your guy is only one vote short of a majority, it is impossible for any other candidate to get 50% plus one vote. The best they can possibly get is 50% minus one vote, which is not enough to win the election.

However, if you voted for B because you thought B was more likely to win, then this can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If A does not get enough votes in the first round, then A will be eliminated. Your vote for A as second choice will not count, because A has already been eliminated.

Therefore, all other things being equal, it is to your benefit to vote for the less popular candidates as your first choices. If they are truly unpopular, then they will be eliminated, but you will still get to vote for the more popular candidate in the next round. And even though you ranked them lower, you will still cast the deciding vote for them.

In summary, if you want to be a responsible voter, then you should vote for six candidates, even if your sixth choice is deeply flawed, as long as choices 7 through 10 are more flawed. If a candidate you do not want wins the election, then you have no valid reason to complain, because you could have voted against that person but chose not to do so.

And if you want to vote in the most strategically beneficial way, then you should vote for less popular candidates as a higher rank than more popular candidates.

Finally, it should be noted that there is absolutely no benefit to voting for the same candidate as more than one choice. For example, assume you vote for C as both your first choice and your second choice. As long as C is still in the running, then your vote will be counted for C, no matter how many rounds the counting goes. Nobody will ever look at who your second choice was.

But if C is eliminated at some point, then the judges will look at your second choice. If C is your second choice, then this vote will not count, because C has already been eliminated. Therefore, there is no rational reason for voting for the same candidate more than once. Your second vote will not help them, and you have deprived yourself of the opportunity to vote for another candidate.

In summary, here is how you should rationally cast your ballot:

• Vote for as many candidates as you have choices, as long as some of them are less objectionalbe than others.
• All other things being equal, vote for the less popular candidate before you vote for the more popular candidate.
• Never vote for the same person more than once.

All of the foregoing advice is non-partisan, and is equally applicable whether you are on the left or right.  To view my personal endorsements in the St. Paul election, please see my earlier post.

This post was prepared and paid for by Richard P. Clem, who is solely responsible for its content, and is not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Vision of Peace statue, St. Paul City Hall. Wikipedia photo.

This year’s St. Paul mayoral race will once again feature ranked voting. There is no primary election–everyone who filed to run for office will be on the November general election ballot. Since there are ten candidates, it’s unlikely that any will get a majority on the first round. To make sure that your vote counts, you are allowed to vote for up to six candidates, and rank those candidates according to your preference.

For the official explanation of ranked voting, see the Ramsey County Elections website.

In the first round of counting, if one candidate gets a majority, then the race is over, and that candidate is the winner. This is the same as any other election. But that’s unlikely to happen. So the race will move to the second round. One candidate will be eliminated, and that candidate’s ballots will be physically removed from the count.

For the second round, the judges will take a look at the second choice of the removed ballots, and those ballots will be awarded to the voter’s second choice candidate.

Ballots are counted again, and another candidate is eliminated. This process continues until some candidate has a majority.

The key rules to remember are:

1. If you really hate some candidate, then you should not vote for them at all. Even if you vote for them in last place, that is potentially a vote for them.
2. Your second place vote will be considered only if your first choice has been eliminated from the race. Therefore, you should not vote for the same candidate twice. Your ballot will still be counted in the first round, but you do your candidate absolutely no good by voting more than once.  The election judges will only look at the second choice if your first choice is already eliminated.  And if you’re voting for someone who is already eliminated, the vote won’t count.
3. Ranked voting gives you the opportunity to vote for someone you don’t think will win, without the proverbial risk of “throwing away your vote.” If your guy loses, then your second choice will still get your vote. And maybe your guy won’t lose.  So there is a strong incentive to vote for the person you really want, even if you don’t believe that they will win.  You’ll still get a chance to vote for your second choice.

Therefore, you are faced with coming up with a list of six candidates that you can live with, and you must rank them in order of preference. Since there are so many names, you might want to make a written list and bring it to the polling place. As long as you take your list home with you when you are done, this is perfectly acceptable.

And here is our list. We endorse the following candidates for mayor in the following order. We list only six, because that’s the maximum number we can vote for. The six on our list are better than the other four, in our opinion.

As explained below, here are our endorsements, in order:

1. Chris Holbrook
2. Tim Holden
3. Trahern Crews
4. Barnabas Joshua Yshua
5. Sharon Anderson
6. Dai Thao

You can find the list of all candidates at the Secretary of State website.

1. Chris Holbrook

ChrisHolbrook.org image.

Our first choice is state Libertarian party chair Chris Holbrook.  Did you vote for Gary Johnson for president in 2016?  We endorsed him, and I voted for him.  I talked to a lot of people who wanted to vote for him but didn’t, because they didn’t want to “waste their vote” by voting for someone they thought would lose.

I never quite understood this.  I thought the whole point of an election was to decide who was going to win, and you don’t know who wins until after people vote.  So not voting for someone just because they’re going to lose doesn’t make a lot of sense.  If you know to a certainty that your guy is going to lose, then you ought to just stay home.  And if the other guy is going to win anyway, then you also may as well just stay home.  But some people think this way, and that is their right.

But thanks to ranked voting, you no longer have to worry if your guy is going to lose.  If he does lose, then your vote still gets counted, because as soon as your guy is out of the running, then they immediately count your second choice.  And maybe your guy won’t lose!

So if you toyed with the idea of voting for Gary Johnson, here’s your chance.  Johnson even endorsed Holbrook in 2014 when Holbrook ran for governor.  Holbrook isn’t spending any money on the campaign.  He’s not putting up signs.  He’s not knocking on doors.  But it’s about time that we elect a libertarian.

2. Tim Holden

Of the remaining candidates, we believe that Tim Holden best supports our fiscally conservative  and free-market principles.  Over the past decades, politicians have been quick to jump on board with programs that amount to welfare for millionaires.  Whether it’s trains or stadiums, we believe that Holden is the least likely of the remaining candidates to advocate raiding the public treasury to finance some private business venture.

3. Trahern Crews

Facebook image.

Our third choice is Trahern Crews.  We probably differ with him politically on a great many issues, such as his support of the $15 minimum wage.  But it does appear that Crews has a true heart for the poor, rather than just giving the poor lip service, which seems to be the norm these days.  He opposed property tax exemptions for a private stadium, and he’s expressed skepticism toward organized trash collection, saying that he favors the free market.

We have no doubt that he will serve honorably if elected, and his proven reputation as a peacemaker in the community indicates that he will be respectful of opposing viewpoints.

4. Barnabas Joshua Yshua

MSPVotes Photo

We still have three slots we need to fill in order to complete our ballot.  We don’t like many of the other candidates, but we conclude that perhaps Barnabas Joshua Yshua will rise to the occasion if St. Paul voters decide that he should be their mayor.  Mr. Yshua is a resident of St. Paul’s Union Gospel Mission.  He’s never held public office.

But he’s never voted in favor of running taxpayer funded trains down the middle of the street.  He’s never voted in favor of using tax dollars to build a stadium for billionaire owners or millionaire players.  And we hope he never will.  He says that he has no political agenda other than helping others.  We have no reason do doubt him, and without hesitation, he is our fourth choice for mayor.

5. Sharon Anderson

Perennial Candidate Sharon Anderson. MSPVotes photo.

We still have two more slots to fill.  The name Sharon Anderson has been on virtually every election ballot in Minnesota since the 1970’s.  One year, she won the primary and became the Republican candidate for attorney general, presumably because her name was the same as a popular television personality.  In press reports, Ms. Anderson’s name is almost always prefaced with the phrase “perennial candidate.”  If you look up “perennial candidate” in the dictionary, you will probably see her picture.  I’ve never voted for her before in my life, despite her name appearing on countless ballots.  But there’s a first time for everything, and this year I’ll vote for her, because she is better than the other five candidates.  She is my fifth choice to serve as mayor of St. Paul.  I have no reason to believe that she will not serve honorably if elected, although I’m sure her tenure in office will be colorful.

6.  Dai Thao

MSPVotes photo.

By the time we get to our sixth choice, we have to start dealing with the DFL, and we recognize that the DFL has made a mess of Minnesota politics.  So we need to start thinking about the least worst of the remaining candidates. After giving the matter serious consideration, we conclude that Dai Thao is the least worst, and he is our sixth choice for mayor of St. Paul.  He’s been accused of bribery, but the alleged conduct doesn’t strike us as being much worse than is typical of DFL politicians.  Thao’s problem in that case seems to be that he was a bit indelicate in how he expressed the kind of proposition that many politicians engage in on a regular basis.  At the very least, as a Hmong American, Thao does bring some needed diversity to city hall.  In short, he’s better than the other four candidates.  So through the magic of ranked voting, we have an opportunity to vote against those other four.  Thao is our sixth choice for mayor.

This page was prepared and paid for by Richard P. Clem, and is not approved by any candidate or candidate’s committee.