I just checked in the mirror . . . I'm not a machine. But I do have some advice for District 4 voters who basically support the mayor's agenda: Only rank candidates whose first name begins with a vowel -- Eric, Eli, Olivia. That's three. You don't need to rank six, and don't rank anyone you don't want representing you on council.
Author here. The bio above belongs to a different Robert S. Miller, a social worker. I'm the one with five decades in casino gaming. I'd happily take the promotion, but he earned it. The argument about the machine is all mine.
This is a good article Robert but not enough… please take it one step further. Don’t leave it up to the mayor, give us the slate. Let him adjust it if he wants. We need to start somewhere. Feel free to DM me
"The common work is not mysterious. Keep streets safe. Address homelessness with measurable results. Maintain parks, roads and basic services. Tell the truth about budgets and capital projects. Hire people capable of doing the work. Treat disagreement as part of representative government rather than evidence of moral contamination. Keep foreign policy and national ideological campaigns from consuming institutions that have no competence to conduct either."
Principles of governance we beleaguered citizens are always promised by local politicians - city, county and metro. So how is it that the moral and physical decline of our city (and county) rages on unabated ? A political machine sounds like a decent fix for the short term, eliminating ideological bias in "the common work", but we need a fix for the long term, and moderate centrists afraid to offend any special interest that endorsed their candidacy corrupts their decision making and is not the answer. Time for new ideas and people unafraid to attack a system that simply "exists". One that simply exists need not be preserved.....we see the results every day.....especially on April 15th. DSA is ideologically bound, but most sitting councilors and commissioners are as well, just bound to another condition, preserving the status quo. We need new ideas. New voices. People whose allegiance is to the community they promised to serve, not a foreign ideology or campaign endorsers/contributors. I can only identify two: Keith Wilson and Sharon Meieran.
One thing people miss about ranked-choice voting is that “only rank candidates you want to win” is not always the best strategic use of your ballot.
Your fourth choice can be a defensive choice. You may not especially want that candidate to win, but you may clearly prefer them over the only alternative still in the race. Ranking them does not hurt the candidates you ranked first, second, or third.
For example, suppose two of your top three choices are elected, but your third choice does poorly and is eventually eliminated. If you ranked only those three, any remaining transferable value on your ballot may be exhausted and you no longer have a say among the candidates still competing for the final seat. If you ranked a fourth acceptable candidate, whatever transferable value remains on your ballot can move to that candidate instead.
Because Portland uses fractional surplus transfers, that may be only part of your original vote rather than a full vote. But across thousands of ballots, those fractions can add up and potentially determine who wins the final seat.
In other words, your fourth choice can simply be the lesser of the remaining evils.
Dynamite piece. Only a few Big Questions: Is Wilson the person to assemble the Sane Government coalition, given the propensity of (a) the mayor's waffling personality and (b) Portland's middle-roaders (yes, they exist) to tune out the evident social and political decay on the well-founded belief that nothing they do or think counts for bupkus (c) the laziness and arrogance of our dominant legacy media outlets (aka: If Portland's future is being described by Sophie Peel, god help us).
That's not a lot for even a political genius to work with, and anyone who fits the bill will probably look at the effort to move the needle a millimeter with trepidation.
Cities rise and fall (just ask anyone left in Gary, Indiana); Oregon is a poor state; the American economy is ruthless in sorting winners and the DOA. Might be a lost cause, but maybe--just maybe--Portland can pull itself together. Miller has told us part of what it'll take.
Robert, I recognize how much work and emotion you put into your piece. Thank you.
Let me say this: it was exhausting and Lisa Caballero seems to have identified what I will do:
Mark my ballot (this is my first time voting since I am new and have never seen a ballot nor voted in "rank choice" election (what a crock it appears to be). Personally, I like Eric, Eli and Olivia.
I am still confused. What does my ballot actually provide in terms of choices? How many entries? I will NOT put Mitch Green anywhere.
Mayor Wilson bought some credibility by his Lincoln decision but I am not impressed with very much else of what he has done. Has he ever complimented Police Chief Bob Day? or made any moves to add to the police force?
As I see it, the die is cast but for the mechanics of the actual vote. I would appreciate seeing what a ballot actually states.
Thank you again. Your passion is palpable but my bandwidth is quite narrow when it comes to visualizing how not to make any mistakes in my voting.
Ranked choice voting in multi-member districts is a way of achieving/mimicking proportional voting within our election system. Most people get hung up over the mechanics of the ballot and completely miss this big picture. I like the system a lot. Here's a delightful video (by Portland musician Mont Chris Hubbard) which explains what that is all about:
Thank you, Lisa. The video describing proportional voting was clear. The manner in which ballots are counted and how winners are decided was not included as you know. The skeptic in me says that this is where the details really exist. " Sell the delicious looking sausage but don't reveal what's in it." Hmmm
If Mayor Wilson does not step up, and, like minded candidates who oppose the DSA-linked representatives, I still don't see the path that would satisfy me nor do I know what not to do Other than make sure Mitch Green or any other DSA-type is not on my ballot.
In retrospect, I would have not voted for proportional voting. The ability to slant the playing field by the DSA-types reveals not only the weakness but also the opportunity for deception.
Finally.
I just checked in the mirror . . . I'm not a machine. But I do have some advice for District 4 voters who basically support the mayor's agenda: Only rank candidates whose first name begins with a vowel -- Eric, Eli, Olivia. That's three. You don't need to rank six, and don't rank anyone you don't want representing you on council.
And there is a corollary, "Ditch Mitch."
Author here. The bio above belongs to a different Robert S. Miller, a social worker. I'm the one with five decades in casino gaming. I'd happily take the promotion, but he earned it. The argument about the machine is all mine.
This is a good article Robert but not enough… please take it one step further. Don’t leave it up to the mayor, give us the slate. Let him adjust it if he wants. We need to start somewhere. Feel free to DM me
Publishing a piece called Do This…
"The common work is not mysterious. Keep streets safe. Address homelessness with measurable results. Maintain parks, roads and basic services. Tell the truth about budgets and capital projects. Hire people capable of doing the work. Treat disagreement as part of representative government rather than evidence of moral contamination. Keep foreign policy and national ideological campaigns from consuming institutions that have no competence to conduct either."
Principles of governance we beleaguered citizens are always promised by local politicians - city, county and metro. So how is it that the moral and physical decline of our city (and county) rages on unabated ? A political machine sounds like a decent fix for the short term, eliminating ideological bias in "the common work", but we need a fix for the long term, and moderate centrists afraid to offend any special interest that endorsed their candidacy corrupts their decision making and is not the answer. Time for new ideas and people unafraid to attack a system that simply "exists". One that simply exists need not be preserved.....we see the results every day.....especially on April 15th. DSA is ideologically bound, but most sitting councilors and commissioners are as well, just bound to another condition, preserving the status quo. We need new ideas. New voices. People whose allegiance is to the community they promised to serve, not a foreign ideology or campaign endorsers/contributors. I can only identify two: Keith Wilson and Sharon Meieran.
One thing people miss about ranked-choice voting is that “only rank candidates you want to win” is not always the best strategic use of your ballot.
Your fourth choice can be a defensive choice. You may not especially want that candidate to win, but you may clearly prefer them over the only alternative still in the race. Ranking them does not hurt the candidates you ranked first, second, or third.
For example, suppose two of your top three choices are elected, but your third choice does poorly and is eventually eliminated. If you ranked only those three, any remaining transferable value on your ballot may be exhausted and you no longer have a say among the candidates still competing for the final seat. If you ranked a fourth acceptable candidate, whatever transferable value remains on your ballot can move to that candidate instead.
Because Portland uses fractional surplus transfers, that may be only part of your original vote rather than a full vote. But across thousands of ballots, those fractions can add up and potentially determine who wins the final seat.
In other words, your fourth choice can simply be the lesser of the remaining evils.
Dynamite piece. Only a few Big Questions: Is Wilson the person to assemble the Sane Government coalition, given the propensity of (a) the mayor's waffling personality and (b) Portland's middle-roaders (yes, they exist) to tune out the evident social and political decay on the well-founded belief that nothing they do or think counts for bupkus (c) the laziness and arrogance of our dominant legacy media outlets (aka: If Portland's future is being described by Sophie Peel, god help us).
That's not a lot for even a political genius to work with, and anyone who fits the bill will probably look at the effort to move the needle a millimeter with trepidation.
Cities rise and fall (just ask anyone left in Gary, Indiana); Oregon is a poor state; the American economy is ruthless in sorting winners and the DOA. Might be a lost cause, but maybe--just maybe--Portland can pull itself together. Miller has told us part of what it'll take.
Robert, I recognize how much work and emotion you put into your piece. Thank you.
Let me say this: it was exhausting and Lisa Caballero seems to have identified what I will do:
Mark my ballot (this is my first time voting since I am new and have never seen a ballot nor voted in "rank choice" election (what a crock it appears to be). Personally, I like Eric, Eli and Olivia.
I am still confused. What does my ballot actually provide in terms of choices? How many entries? I will NOT put Mitch Green anywhere.
Mayor Wilson bought some credibility by his Lincoln decision but I am not impressed with very much else of what he has done. Has he ever complimented Police Chief Bob Day? or made any moves to add to the police force?
As I see it, the die is cast but for the mechanics of the actual vote. I would appreciate seeing what a ballot actually states.
Thank you again. Your passion is palpable but my bandwidth is quite narrow when it comes to visualizing how not to make any mistakes in my voting.
Marc,
The mechanics of filling out a ranked choice voting ballot are simple, here's a dummy ballot from Multnomah County (which administers city elections).
https://app.rankedvote.co/rv/yngrjcmklg4r7xsoq6/vote
Ranked choice voting in multi-member districts is a way of achieving/mimicking proportional voting within our election system. Most people get hung up over the mechanics of the ballot and completely miss this big picture. I like the system a lot. Here's a delightful video (by Portland musician Mont Chris Hubbard) which explains what that is all about:
https://www.instagram.com/montchris/reel/CkBwb3SDSQA/?locale=ko-KR&hl=en
Who's running:
https://www.portland.gov/auditor/elections/run4office/2026-city-candidates#toc-qualified-city-candidates-councilor-district-4
Thank you, Lisa. The video describing proportional voting was clear. The manner in which ballots are counted and how winners are decided was not included as you know. The skeptic in me says that this is where the details really exist. " Sell the delicious looking sausage but don't reveal what's in it." Hmmm
If Mayor Wilson does not step up, and, like minded candidates who oppose the DSA-linked representatives, I still don't see the path that would satisfy me nor do I know what not to do Other than make sure Mitch Green or any other DSA-type is not on my ballot.
In retrospect, I would have not voted for proportional voting. The ability to slant the playing field by the DSA-types reveals not only the weakness but also the opportunity for deception.