Screenshot

We know we cannot count on the corporate media to supply alternatives, so we have to take it upon ourselves (the WRIR lesson)….
As stated here previously, Paul Goldman deserves a lot of credit for almost single-handily obtaining the 10,000 signatures needed to make the City charter change for voting Mayor at large in the first place, but it’s past time for more electoral reform. We know we need to update and strengthen the City’s Board of Elections anyway, so we might as well join other cities around the world in enacting RCV/IRV.

Ranked choice voting (RCV) — also known as instant runoff voting (IRV) — makes our elections better by allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference.

RCV is straightforward: Voters have the option to rank candidates in order of preference: first, second, third and so forth. If your first choice doesn’t have a chance to win, your ballot counts for your next choice.

RCV works in all types of elections and supports more representative outcomes. RCV means better choices, better campaigns, and better representation. That’s why it’s the fastest-growing voting reform in the nation…

Except, of course, in decidedly unprogressive Richmond, VA, where City Council tossed it aside.

UVA, GMU, JMU, and Washington & Lee use it for their campus/student government elections, but VCU, UR, and VUU are still behind the times, despite the offered prize.

Anyway, back to challenging the status quo… Note that this is just a poll, of course, and that according to the current Mayoral election rules, the winner is not who wins the popular vote. It’s not who gets the most votes, it’s who gets the most votes out of five out of the nine City Council districts. Which does makes an expensive runoff election a distinct possibility… a problem that RCV could solve.

But for now, vote in this ‘mock election’. Just don’t forget the real stakes involved and tell your favorite candidate to do the required homework…

Julian Assange during a 2014 press conference attended by international media

On October 1, 2024, Julian Assange broke his silence. The WikiLeaks founder testified before the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) about the chilling effect his detention and conviction has had on human rights. When Assange was detained, The Committee previously found he met PACE’s definition of a political prisoner. Assange’s testimony marked his first substantive, public comments in over half a decade. Other than his remarks at his sentencing hearing, the public has largely not heard from Assange since his 2019 arrest.

For what it is worth, this ‘community news site’, even in its mostly ‘amateur’ status, declares its solidarity with Julian Assange. Hopefully, this site will not get targeted by the C.I.A. for doing so. It is more noteworthy and distressing that local ‘professional’ journalists have not done more to declare their solidarity.

It’s also an election year, and, incredibly, Donald Trump is running for re-election as President of the United States. What is sad and remarkable is that many citizens still don’t know or have forgotten that Assange revealed how Trump was made into a serious political candidate in the first place. The reality is that much of the ‘transnational repression’ we have seen from the U.S. government in regard to Assange is most likely not instigated from the WikiLeaks publication/documenting of U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, but from their revelations on the amount of triangulation involved in American politics.

It’s noteworthy that one of Oregon Hill’s previous Halloween parades (2013) was in honor of whistleblowers Assange, Manning, and Snowden.

When journalism is criminalized, as in Assange’s case, things get truly scary.