4 ms·
Last I checked New York had fusion voting. Chicago had fusion voting until the 1990s. California had fusion voting as late as the 1940s - not sure when it ende
by pyuser583 4y ago
Last I checked New York had fusion voting. Chicago had fusion voting until the 1990s.
California had fusion voting as late as the 1940s - not sure when it ended.
So it’s not as simple as “winner takes all.”
NB: fusion voting is where candidates are endorsed by multiple parties. So you can be a Democrat and a Libertarian.
- knodi123 4y ago> So it’s not as simple as “winner takes all.” Yes it is. You just misunderstood what I meant. from https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/allocation https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/allocation > All States, except for Maine and Nebraska have a winner-take-all policy where the State looks only at the overall winner of the state-wide popular vote. Maine and Nebraska, however, appoint individual electors based on the winner of the popular vote for each Congressional district and then 2 electors based on the winner of the overall state-wide popular vote.
- seanmcdirmid 4y agoThat is only for presidential elections. I assume the original comment covered elections in general. Washington state, for example, has single primaries (top two advance to general election regardless of party) rather than a partisan primary for every election except presidential.