Who won, who lost and how did the ballot measures fare? Guest host Scott Shafer takes a look at results in Bay Area elections including analysis of ranked-choice voting and the political clout of Asian-Americans.

David Lee, executive director of the Chinese American Voters Education Committee (CAVEC)
Corey Cook, assistant professor of politics and director of the Leo McCarthy Center for Public Service and the Common Good at the University of San Francisco
Willie Brown, former mayor of San Francisco
Steven Hill, designer and supporter of the ranked-choice voting systems in San Francisco and Oakland and author of "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy"
Omar Khalif, parent and co-chair of Families for Neighborhood Schools, which supports Measure H
Corey Marshall, good government policy director for San Francisco Planning and Urban Research

  • ERIC

    I recall that in the aftermath of the 2000 Presidential election (Bush vs. Gore) liberals and progressives screamed that “every vote should count” after the U.S. Supreme Court brought the recount process to a halt.  Seems to me that ranked choice elections are NOT following the principle of “every vote should count” (otherwise if they did, it is unlikely that Jean Quan would be mayor of Oakland).

  • Genie345

    It seems that ranked choice voting opens up the choices of the citizen. Instead of choosing just one candidate we get to choose our top two. It also keeps the campaigning down to what counts; the policies of those running.

  • Chrisco

    Ed Lee just committed a big fraud. It may be perfectly legal but it is fraud to me. He only was elected because he was appointed. He was only appointed because he promised not to use that perch to run for election. He then reneged on this promise. He is not elected without this broken promise.

  • Mike Northrop

    We need more Ranked Choice Voting elections to avoid wasted votes and the spoiler effect. If Florida voters had RCV in 2000, those who voted for Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader would have been able to transfer their choice to another candidate after they were eliminated. RCV is the only system that eliminates both wasted votes and the spoiler effect. 

  • carlboygenius / san francisco

    HOW can the Ed Lee promoters be crowing about accurately representing the SF population @this point? • Out of 805,235 San Franciscans (2010Census), only 463,380 are registered voters. Voter turn out was 30.97% = 143,508 San Franciscans who voted yesterday. Out of THAT? Currently, only 30.97% voted for Ed Lee = 44,444 San Franciscans. • That is only 5.5% of the TOTAL SF POPULATION. • HOW can they be crowing about a “big win” or “mandate” at this point? Seem’s they’re being premature…

  • Mike Northrop

    When will San Francisco increase the number of rankings beyond 3? There should be as many rankings as there are candidates to avoid exhausted ballots. Let’s not toss RCV out the window when a simple fix will address the problem. It’s clear we need more RCV education from KQED, rather than perpetuating falsehoods or red herrings.

  • Babette Hogan

    This was a very useful show.  Thanks so much.

  • WhoSez

    I’ve heard that the media has generally taken a stance against RCV. Is this true? It seems possible to me given  RCV advocate Steven Hill, who is local, was not also included on the main panel.  The media economically thrives on extended campaign seasons, so they are not above scrutiny in taking positions, even subtle ones such as which guests are invited to be in the studio for an hour long show and which are called in for a few minutes.  

    San Francisco voters elected to have RCV and since that time, it has been challenged by big downtown money interests whose candidates fare better in extended campaigns.  If we are to step outside of the Bay Area, polls reveal that voters find ranked choice ballot easy to use and have experienced campaigns that have promoted civic engagement. (one e.g. It appears that almost all the time, the favored candidate finally emerges as the winner and abates the issues of both gov. and campaign expenses and drop in civic engagement, contrary to Lee’s criticisms.

    Lee suggests that the voters are confused by RCV, but this is not proven out in other places where it has been implemented.  Perhaps, it is the case in the Asian community with which his work focuses; he would understand that best.  However, it is ironic, given the Chinese cultural love of card games and ability with an abacus (which is a mystery to me) that his community is  not sophisticated enough to understand the process.  Still, language barriers can be a big part of the issue here which is a valid concern.

    I have also heard concerns by some who have watched the RCV system be gamed – but that is the fault of all systems.

    Can we hear another show that actually focuses on reform issues and invites Steven Hill to the table as well as critiques of RCV.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor