Arizona Debates: Props. 140 and 133 - Partisan Primaries 

Im voting No on both propositions. Both are extreme.

I think I might vote on both as well

I appreciate this debate, but am still frustrated. I think my main problem with 140 is the number of things they are trying to do together? Like, equalizing signature requirements seems like an easy win to help level the playing field, could have been seperate- I am a fan of ranked choice voting specifically for the thing I see another comment mentions but did not get brought up in this debate: spoiler candidates. I understand that the pro 140 person was not trying to argue for ranked choice, but it does seem obvious that this proposition is trying to lay groundwork for the possibility of ranked choice? And in my opinion a huge selling point of ranked choice is the ability to vote for the candidate you actually want the most first, and then hedge your bets with other candidates. If you have someone that you really like but you're afraid that you can't get enough votes to win and you also have a candidate that you really really hate, but there's a third candidate That you're not a huge fan of but you would be fine with, in our current system you have to vote for the candidate that you think stands the best chance of beating the candidate you hate, which means that the candidate who wins just has to be less bad than that hateful candidate. But under a ranked choice system You don't have to worry about whether your candidate can win, just whether you like them? So you vote for the candidate you actually like and then you vote for the one you're fine with etc and that means that more people vote for a long shot that they really like, and that is how you get more than two parties, you get candidates who are outside of the system. Whereas under the current rules even if a lot of people like that third party candidate, people are too nervous that that candidate cannot win and not willing to take the risk that a candidate that they really really dislike would win. I do not find voter confusion at number of candidates persuasive, as long as candidates still have party affiliation listed- if you are a voter that doesn't care to do research on candidates, you still may go in and vote party-line. But voters are encouraged to pay attention to candidates ahead of time, and are welcome to bring note paper into booths with them, and of course if you have a ballot you are mailing in You can fill out your ballot as you do your research.

This is the one thing on my ballot I was undecided on. This debate was helpful. Thank you for posting it. A general election that includes 3 or more candidates, with 2 or more from the same party would be extremely problematic. The 2 candidate party would pull votes from each other. Ranked choice solves this, so I understand why it's a necessary component.

I say all should have an equal chance to the ballet because if we split 50/50 the parties keep fighting and it will cause a greater split. And we need a voice for all so we can vote on our policies and sometimes it requires the vote of the opposite party.

This is a tough prop 😢

Trump supporter voting at the moment. Trying to figure out this local law. I will never vote Democrat on anything.