<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" encoding="UTF-8" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:googleplay="http://www.google.com/schemas/play-podcasts/1.0" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:fireside="http://fireside.fm/modules/rss/fireside">
  <channel>
    <fireside:hostname>web02.fireside.fm</fireside:hostname>
    <fireside:genDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 12:17:43 -0500</fireside:genDate>
    <generator>Fireside (https://fireside.fm)</generator>
    <title>Tatter - Episodes Tagged with “Voting”</title>
    <link>https://tatter.fireside.fm/tags/voting</link>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2020 06:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
    <description>This is a podcast exploring issues in politics and policy. Each episode features conversation with at least one subject matter expert, with a goal of helping listeners better understand the topic.
</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <itunes:type>episodic</itunes:type>
    <itunes:subtitle>Politics and Policy</itunes:subtitle>
    <itunes:author>Michael Sargent</itunes:author>
    <itunes:summary>This is a podcast exploring issues in politics and policy. Each episode features conversation with at least one subject matter expert, with a goal of helping listeners better understand the topic.
</itunes:summary>
    <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/f/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/cover.jpg?v=1"/>
    <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
    <itunes:keywords>politics, policy, law</itunes:keywords>
    <itunes:owner>
      <itunes:name>Michael Sargent</itunes:name>
      <itunes:email>profsargent@gmail.com</itunes:email>
    </itunes:owner>
<itunes:category text="Society &amp; Culture"/>
<itunes:category text="Science">
  <itunes:category text="Social Sciences"/>
</itunes:category>
<item>
  <title>Episode 64: Rogue (Conspiracy Theories, w/ Kelley-Romano &amp; Miller)</title>
  <link>https://tatter.fireside.fm/64</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="false">bfcc2397-70f1-4b19-841f-e1051cdfe651</guid>
  <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2020 06:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
  <author>Michael Sargent</author>
  <enclosure url="https://aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/bfcc2397-70f1-4b19-841f-e1051cdfe651.mp3" length="29533981" type="audio/mpeg"/>
  <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
  <itunes:author>Michael Sargent</itunes:author>
  <itunes:subtitle>Stephanie Kelley-Romano and Joanne Miller talk conspiracy theories with me.</itunes:subtitle>
  <itunes:duration>58:43</itunes:duration>
  <itunes:explicit>yes</itunes:explicit>
  <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/f/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/episodes/b/bfcc2397-70f1-4b19-841f-e1051cdfe651/cover.jpg?v=2"/>
  <description>ABOUT THIS EPISODE
Even though some conspiracy theories are only endorsed by a small fraction of the population, it is likely a mistake to write off all who believe in conspiracy theories, especially since some theories are endorsed more widely, and with substantial effect. I discuss these issues with two conspiracy theory researchers: Stephanie Kelley-Romano of the Bates College Department of Rhetoric, Film, and Screen Studies, and Joanne Miller of the University of Delaware Department of Political Science &amp;amp; International Relations.
LINKS
--Stephanie Kelley-Romano's Bates College web profile (https://www.bates.edu/rhetoric-film-screen-studies/faculty/kelley-romano-stephanie/)
--Joanne Miller's University of Delaware web profile (https://www.poscir.udel.edu/people/faculty/MillerJ?uid=MillerJ&amp;amp;Name=Dr.%20Joanne%20Miller)
--"Trust no one: The conspiracy genre on American television," (Stephanie Kelley-Romano, in The Southern Communication Journal) (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephanie_Kelley-Romano/publication/241744909_Trust_No_One_The_Conspiracy_Genre_on_American_Television/links/5cf7f826299bf1fb185ba603/Trust-No-One-The-Conspiracy-Genre-on-American-Television.pdf)
--"Make American hate again: Donald Trump and th birther conspiracy," (Stephanie Kelley-Romano &amp;amp; Kathryn Carew, in The Journal of Hate Studies) (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ryan_Scrivens/publication/330482179_The_Dangers_of_Porous_Borders_The_Trump_Effect_in_Canada_Journal_of_Hate_Studies/links/5c41dea092851c22a37ea15b/The-Dangers-of-Porous-Borders-The-Trump-Effect-in-Canada-Journal-of-Hate-Studies.pdf#page=40)
--"Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust," (Joanne Miller, Kyle Saunders, &amp;amp; Christina Farhart, in American Journal of Political Science) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ajps.12234)
--"Gender differences in COVID-19 conspiracy theory beliefs," (Erin Cassese, Christina Farhart, &amp;amp; Joanne Miller, in Politics &amp;amp; Gender) (https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/11E1C0AA1837CFA7E3926F5E9AF30782/S1743923X20000409a.pdf/div-class-title-gender-differences-in-covid-19-conspiracy-theory-beliefs-div.pdf)
--Little A'Le'Inn (Rachel, NV) (http://www.littlealeinn.com/) Special Guests: Joanne Miller and Stephanie Kelley-Romano.
</description>
  <itunes:keywords>conspiracy theory, rhetoric, political science, psychology, COVID-19, voting</itunes:keywords>
  <content:encoded>
    <![CDATA[<p><strong>ABOUT THIS EPISODE</strong><br>
Even though some conspiracy theories are only endorsed by a small fraction of the population, it is likely a mistake to write off all who believe in conspiracy theories, especially since some theories are endorsed more widely, and with substantial effect. I discuss these issues with two conspiracy theory researchers: Stephanie Kelley-Romano of the Bates College Department of Rhetoric, Film, and Screen Studies, and Joanne Miller of the University of Delaware Department of Political Science &amp; International Relations.</p>

<p><strong>LINKS</strong><br>
<a href="https://www.bates.edu/rhetoric-film-screen-studies/faculty/kelley-romano-stephanie/" rel="nofollow">--Stephanie Kelley-Romano&#39;s Bates College web profile</a><br>
<a href="https://www.poscir.udel.edu/people/faculty/MillerJ?uid=MillerJ&Name=Dr.%20Joanne%20Miller" rel="nofollow">--Joanne Miller&#39;s University of Delaware web profile</a><br>
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephanie_Kelley-Romano/publication/241744909_Trust_No_One_The_Conspiracy_Genre_on_American_Television/links/5cf7f826299bf1fb185ba603/Trust-No-One-The-Conspiracy-Genre-on-American-Television.pdf" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Trust no one: The conspiracy genre on American television,&quot; (Stephanie Kelley-Romano, in The Southern Communication Journal)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ryan_Scrivens/publication/330482179_The_Dangers_of_Porous_Borders_The_Trump_Effect_in_Canada_Journal_of_Hate_Studies/links/5c41dea092851c22a37ea15b/The-Dangers-of-Porous-Borders-The-Trump-Effect-in-Canada-Journal-of-Hate-Studies.pdf#page=40" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Make American hate again: Donald Trump and th birther conspiracy,&quot; (Stephanie Kelley-Romano &amp; Kathryn Carew, in The Journal of Hate Studies)</a><br>
<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ajps.12234" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust,&quot; (Joanne Miller, Kyle Saunders, &amp; Christina Farhart, in American Journal of Political Science)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/11E1C0AA1837CFA7E3926F5E9AF30782/S1743923X20000409a.pdf/div-class-title-gender-differences-in-covid-19-conspiracy-theory-beliefs-div.pdf" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Gender differences in COVID-19 conspiracy theory beliefs,&quot; (Erin Cassese, Christina Farhart, &amp; Joanne Miller, in Politics &amp; Gender)</a><br>
<a href="http://www.littlealeinn.com/" rel="nofollow">--Little A&#39;Le&#39;Inn (Rachel, NV)</a></p><p>Special Guests: Joanne Miller and Stephanie Kelley-Romano.</p>]]>
  </content:encoded>
  <itunes:summary>
    <![CDATA[<p><strong>ABOUT THIS EPISODE</strong><br>
Even though some conspiracy theories are only endorsed by a small fraction of the population, it is likely a mistake to write off all who believe in conspiracy theories, especially since some theories are endorsed more widely, and with substantial effect. I discuss these issues with two conspiracy theory researchers: Stephanie Kelley-Romano of the Bates College Department of Rhetoric, Film, and Screen Studies, and Joanne Miller of the University of Delaware Department of Political Science &amp; International Relations.</p>

<p><strong>LINKS</strong><br>
<a href="https://www.bates.edu/rhetoric-film-screen-studies/faculty/kelley-romano-stephanie/" rel="nofollow">--Stephanie Kelley-Romano&#39;s Bates College web profile</a><br>
<a href="https://www.poscir.udel.edu/people/faculty/MillerJ?uid=MillerJ&Name=Dr.%20Joanne%20Miller" rel="nofollow">--Joanne Miller&#39;s University of Delaware web profile</a><br>
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephanie_Kelley-Romano/publication/241744909_Trust_No_One_The_Conspiracy_Genre_on_American_Television/links/5cf7f826299bf1fb185ba603/Trust-No-One-The-Conspiracy-Genre-on-American-Television.pdf" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Trust no one: The conspiracy genre on American television,&quot; (Stephanie Kelley-Romano, in The Southern Communication Journal)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ryan_Scrivens/publication/330482179_The_Dangers_of_Porous_Borders_The_Trump_Effect_in_Canada_Journal_of_Hate_Studies/links/5c41dea092851c22a37ea15b/The-Dangers-of-Porous-Borders-The-Trump-Effect-in-Canada-Journal-of-Hate-Studies.pdf#page=40" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Make American hate again: Donald Trump and th birther conspiracy,&quot; (Stephanie Kelley-Romano &amp; Kathryn Carew, in The Journal of Hate Studies)</a><br>
<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ajps.12234" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust,&quot; (Joanne Miller, Kyle Saunders, &amp; Christina Farhart, in American Journal of Political Science)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/11E1C0AA1837CFA7E3926F5E9AF30782/S1743923X20000409a.pdf/div-class-title-gender-differences-in-covid-19-conspiracy-theory-beliefs-div.pdf" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Gender differences in COVID-19 conspiracy theory beliefs,&quot; (Erin Cassese, Christina Farhart, &amp; Joanne Miller, in Politics &amp; Gender)</a><br>
<a href="http://www.littlealeinn.com/" rel="nofollow">--Little A&#39;Le&#39;Inn (Rachel, NV)</a></p><p>Special Guests: Joanne Miller and Stephanie Kelley-Romano.</p>]]>
  </itunes:summary>
</item>
<item>
  <title>Episode 62: Hard Knocks (w/ Seth Masket)</title>
  <link>https://tatter.fireside.fm/62</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="false">4c24a1e8-9c30-489e-8f83-4cf30596e446</guid>
  <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2020 12:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
  <author>Michael Sargent</author>
  <enclosure url="https://aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/4c24a1e8-9c30-489e-8f83-4cf30596e446.mp3" length="23632175" type="audio/mpeg"/>
  <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
  <itunes:author>Michael Sargent</itunes:author>
  <itunes:subtitle>My conversation with political scientist Seth Masket about political parties, and the lessons they learn from losing (and sometimes winning).</itunes:subtitle>
  <itunes:duration>49:11</itunes:duration>
  <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
  <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/f/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/episodes/4/4c24a1e8-9c30-489e-8f83-4cf30596e446/cover.jpg?v=1"/>
  <description>ABOUT THIS EPISODE
As Democrats were reminded (the hard way) in 2016, elections don't always turn out as we expect them to. When a political party loses an election, especially if it does more poorly than expected, it often has tough, self-reflective conversations about what happened. In so doing, parties try to learn lessons from their losses. University of Denver political scientist has written about these issues in his new book, Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020.
LINKS
--Seth Masket's DU profile (https://www.du.edu/ahss/polisci/facultystaff/masket_seth.html)
--Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020 (Amazon) (https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Loss-Democrats-Seth-Masket/dp/1108482120)
--"Amid tears and anger, House Democrats promise 'deep dive' on election losses," by Luke Broadwater and Nicholas Fandos (New York Times, 2020, Nov. 5) (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/us/house-democrats-election-losses.html)
--"Susan Collins was never going to lose," by Robert Messenger (New York Times, 2020, Nov. 6) (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/opinion/susan-collins-was-never-going-to-lose.html)
--Fair Fight (Voting Rights Organization founded by Stacey Abrams) (https://fairfight.com/) Special Guest: Seth Masket.
</description>
  <itunes:keywords>politics, political science, political parties, elections, voting, race</itunes:keywords>
  <content:encoded>
    <![CDATA[<p><strong>ABOUT THIS EPISODE</strong><br>
As Democrats were reminded (the hard way) in 2016, elections don&#39;t always turn out as we expect them to. When a political party loses an election, especially if it does more poorly than expected, it often has tough, self-reflective conversations about what happened. In so doing, parties try to learn lessons from their losses. University of Denver political scientist has written about these issues in his new book, <em>Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020</em>.</p>

<p><strong>LINKS</strong><br>
<a href="https://www.du.edu/ahss/polisci/facultystaff/masket_seth.html" rel="nofollow">--Seth Masket&#39;s DU profile</a><br>
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Loss-Democrats-Seth-Masket/dp/1108482120" rel="nofollow">--Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020 (Amazon)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/us/house-democrats-election-losses.html" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Amid tears and anger, House Democrats promise &#39;deep dive&#39; on election losses,&quot; by Luke Broadwater and Nicholas Fandos (<em>New York Times</em>, 2020, Nov. 5)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/opinion/susan-collins-was-never-going-to-lose.html" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Susan Collins was never going to lose,&quot; by Robert Messenger (<em>New York Times</em>, 2020, Nov. 6)</a><br>
<a href="https://fairfight.com/" rel="nofollow">--Fair Fight (Voting Rights Organization founded by Stacey Abrams)</a></p><p>Special Guest: Seth Masket.</p>]]>
  </content:encoded>
  <itunes:summary>
    <![CDATA[<p><strong>ABOUT THIS EPISODE</strong><br>
As Democrats were reminded (the hard way) in 2016, elections don&#39;t always turn out as we expect them to. When a political party loses an election, especially if it does more poorly than expected, it often has tough, self-reflective conversations about what happened. In so doing, parties try to learn lessons from their losses. University of Denver political scientist has written about these issues in his new book, <em>Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020</em>.</p>

<p><strong>LINKS</strong><br>
<a href="https://www.du.edu/ahss/polisci/facultystaff/masket_seth.html" rel="nofollow">--Seth Masket&#39;s DU profile</a><br>
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Loss-Democrats-Seth-Masket/dp/1108482120" rel="nofollow">--Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020 (Amazon)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/us/house-democrats-election-losses.html" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Amid tears and anger, House Democrats promise &#39;deep dive&#39; on election losses,&quot; by Luke Broadwater and Nicholas Fandos (<em>New York Times</em>, 2020, Nov. 5)</a><br>
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/opinion/susan-collins-was-never-going-to-lose.html" rel="nofollow">--&quot;Susan Collins was never going to lose,&quot; by Robert Messenger (<em>New York Times</em>, 2020, Nov. 6)</a><br>
<a href="https://fairfight.com/" rel="nofollow">--Fair Fight (Voting Rights Organization founded by Stacey Abrams)</a></p><p>Special Guest: Seth Masket.</p>]]>
  </itunes:summary>
</item>
<item>
  <title>Episode 14: Spoiled</title>
  <link>https://tatter.fireside.fm/14</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="false">56064cfd-275e-4974-be22-37c0a6234c45</guid>
  <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2018 12:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
  <author>Michael Sargent</author>
  <enclosure url="https://aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/56064cfd-275e-4974-be22-37c0a6234c45.mp3" length="13523170" type="audio/mp3"/>
  <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
  <itunes:author>Michael Sargent</itunes:author>
  <itunes:subtitle>Once upon a time, I was an enthusiastic supporter of ranked-choice voting. But after reading a bit more, and after this conversation with two political scientists, I'm not so sure anymore.</itunes:subtitle>
  <itunes:duration>27:34</itunes:duration>
  <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
  <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/f/fdeb9f47-842e-4e4f-a682-7d5bb6e8d5a0/episodes/5/56064cfd-275e-4974-be22-37c0a6234c45/cover.jpg?v=2"/>
  <description>In elections with three or more candidates, spoiler effects are thought to occur when one candidate, one with supporters who are ideologically similar to those of another candidate, garners enough support that a third, ideologically dissimilar or even opposite, candidate can win without a majority. For example, in the 2014 Maine gubernatorial general election, Democratic nominee Mike Michaud received 43.4% of the vote, while independent candidate Eliot Cutler received 8.4%. Because Cutler's issue positions (e.g., pro-choice, supportive of marriage equality, pro-union) aligned him more closely with Democrats than the Republican opponent, many have suggested that Cutler's participation in the election drew enough support away from Michaud to prevent what otherwise would have been a Democratic victory. As it was, Republican Paul LePage was elected with 48.2% of the vote, less than a true majority.
Vote-count systems that allow a candidate to win with merely a plurality (i.e., the greatest number of votes, but less than a majority) are vulnerable to spoiler effects. In response to apparent spoiler effects such as this one, and (as some have argued) Ralph Nader's impact on the 2000 U.S. presidential election, some reformers have advocated for the use of ranked-choice voting. In this episode, I talk with political scientists Jason McDaniel (https://politicalscience.sfsu.edu/people/25298/jason-mcdaniel) and Jack Santucci (http://www.jacksantucci.com/) about the potential rewards--but also risks--associated with ranked-choice voting. The risks include ones that could be detrimental to the interests of low-income citizens, and less educated ones.
EPISODE LINKS
2013 Op-ed from Minnesota (Lawrence Jacobs &amp;amp; Joanne Miller)  (http://www.startribune.com/new-minneapolis-voting-rules-could-diminish-equality/218598731/)
2014 Op-ed from Minnesota (Jacobs &amp;amp; Miller redux) (http://www.startribune.com/ranked-choice-voting-by-the-data-still-flawed/245283691/)
FAQ on ranked-choice voting in Maine (http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/rankedchoicefaq.html)
A timeline of actions on ranked choice voting in Maine (http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/pdf/rcvtimeline.pdf)
William Poundstone's "Gaming The Vote" (https://www.amazon.com/Gaming-Vote-Elections-Arent-About/dp/0809048922) Special Guests: Jack Santucci and Jason McDaniel.
</description>
  <content:encoded>
    <![CDATA[<p>In elections with three or more candidates, <em>spoiler effects</em> are thought to occur when one candidate, one with supporters who are ideologically similar to those of another candidate, garners enough support that a third, ideologically dissimilar or even opposite, candidate can win without a majority. For example, in the 2014 Maine gubernatorial general election, Democratic nominee Mike Michaud received 43.4% of the vote, while independent candidate Eliot Cutler received 8.4%. Because Cutler&#39;s issue positions (e.g., pro-choice, supportive of marriage equality, pro-union) aligned him more closely with Democrats than the Republican opponent, many have suggested that Cutler&#39;s participation in the election drew enough support away from Michaud to prevent what otherwise would have been a Democratic victory. As it was, Republican Paul LePage was elected with 48.2% of the vote, less than a true majority.</p>

<p>Vote-count systems that allow a candidate to win with merely a plurality (i.e., the greatest number of votes, but less than a majority) are vulnerable to spoiler effects. In response to apparent spoiler effects such as this one, and (as some have argued) Ralph Nader&#39;s impact on the 2000 U.S. presidential election, some reformers have advocated for the use of ranked-choice voting. In this episode, I talk with political scientists <a href="https://politicalscience.sfsu.edu/people/25298/jason-mcdaniel" rel="nofollow">Jason McDaniel</a> and <a href="http://www.jacksantucci.com/" rel="nofollow">Jack Santucci</a> about the potential rewards--but also risks--associated with ranked-choice voting. The risks include ones that could be detrimental to the interests of low-income citizens, and less educated ones.</p>

<p><strong>EPISODE LINKS</strong><br>
<a href="http://www.startribune.com/new-minneapolis-voting-rules-could-diminish-equality/218598731/" rel="nofollow">2013 Op-ed from Minnesota (Lawrence Jacobs &amp; Joanne Miller) </a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.startribune.com/ranked-choice-voting-by-the-data-still-flawed/245283691/" rel="nofollow">2014 Op-ed from Minnesota (Jacobs &amp; Miller redux)</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/rankedchoicefaq.html" rel="nofollow">FAQ on ranked-choice voting in Maine</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/pdf/rcvtimeline.pdf" rel="nofollow">A timeline of actions on ranked choice voting in Maine</a></p>

<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Gaming-Vote-Elections-Arent-About/dp/0809048922" rel="nofollow">William Poundstone&#39;s &quot;Gaming The Vote&quot;</a></p><p>Special Guests: Jack Santucci and Jason McDaniel.</p>]]>
  </content:encoded>
  <itunes:summary>
    <![CDATA[<p>In elections with three or more candidates, <em>spoiler effects</em> are thought to occur when one candidate, one with supporters who are ideologically similar to those of another candidate, garners enough support that a third, ideologically dissimilar or even opposite, candidate can win without a majority. For example, in the 2014 Maine gubernatorial general election, Democratic nominee Mike Michaud received 43.4% of the vote, while independent candidate Eliot Cutler received 8.4%. Because Cutler&#39;s issue positions (e.g., pro-choice, supportive of marriage equality, pro-union) aligned him more closely with Democrats than the Republican opponent, many have suggested that Cutler&#39;s participation in the election drew enough support away from Michaud to prevent what otherwise would have been a Democratic victory. As it was, Republican Paul LePage was elected with 48.2% of the vote, less than a true majority.</p>

<p>Vote-count systems that allow a candidate to win with merely a plurality (i.e., the greatest number of votes, but less than a majority) are vulnerable to spoiler effects. In response to apparent spoiler effects such as this one, and (as some have argued) Ralph Nader&#39;s impact on the 2000 U.S. presidential election, some reformers have advocated for the use of ranked-choice voting. In this episode, I talk with political scientists <a href="https://politicalscience.sfsu.edu/people/25298/jason-mcdaniel" rel="nofollow">Jason McDaniel</a> and <a href="http://www.jacksantucci.com/" rel="nofollow">Jack Santucci</a> about the potential rewards--but also risks--associated with ranked-choice voting. The risks include ones that could be detrimental to the interests of low-income citizens, and less educated ones.</p>

<p><strong>EPISODE LINKS</strong><br>
<a href="http://www.startribune.com/new-minneapolis-voting-rules-could-diminish-equality/218598731/" rel="nofollow">2013 Op-ed from Minnesota (Lawrence Jacobs &amp; Joanne Miller) </a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.startribune.com/ranked-choice-voting-by-the-data-still-flawed/245283691/" rel="nofollow">2014 Op-ed from Minnesota (Jacobs &amp; Miller redux)</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/rankedchoicefaq.html" rel="nofollow">FAQ on ranked-choice voting in Maine</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/pdf/rcvtimeline.pdf" rel="nofollow">A timeline of actions on ranked choice voting in Maine</a></p>

<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Gaming-Vote-Elections-Arent-About/dp/0809048922" rel="nofollow">William Poundstone&#39;s &quot;Gaming The Vote&quot;</a></p><p>Special Guests: Jack Santucci and Jason McDaniel.</p>]]>
  </itunes:summary>
</item>
  </channel>
</rss>
