St. Louis Post Dispatch Garners Criticism for “Irresponsible” Headlines and Racially Insensitive Editorials

The St. Louis Post Dispatch, like many print newspapers across the U.S., must confront a more difficult environment as online media diverts customers away from more traditional news sources. Even as legacy organizations like the Post seek to adapt, growth seems nearly out of the question. Rather, of the 25 largest legacy print newspapers across the country, including the Post, average weekday circulation was dropping at nearly double digit rates year over year as of 2010 – when the Post publicized its own circulation woes.

It is within this context of a changing media landscape and a shift to online readership that allows us to begin to make sense of the Post’s newer business model. Like many of its online peers, from legacy news media to online powerhouses like BuzzFeed, there has been a growing importance of a sensational headline. Angèle Christin, a researcher and Assistant Professor of Communication at Stanford found that newsrooms across the country are being transformed by metrics and data to increase advertising revenue, often utilizing “clickbait” to draw interest in to an article.

“As online advertising became increasingly competitive, news organizations did what they had to do to survive in this new environment,”

Angèle Christin
Advertisements

The Post is doing just that, relying on clickbait to increase digital advertising revenues as a result of a greater number of clicks. Of course, as explained by the BBC, clickbait can also be a harmful journalistic strategy. With sensationalized headlines fueling clicks, and therefore revenue, the actual substance of the article behind the headline may be entirely unlike what readers expected. These headlines can be misleading, incorrect, or downright harmful. And while there is nothing inherently bad about news organizations utilizing more modern techniques to drive revenue, there is something wrong if this strategy puts real lives in danger or dilutes truly important stories.

Before diving too deep into the Post Dispatch, it’s important to recognize just how important local news organizations are. For reducing or exposing corruption, explaining hot-button political issues, or simply building community, local news is very valuable. Local issues can often be the most impactful and tangible issues that people face. Local corruption and potholes affect you every day. The decline of local news has already resulted in tangible harms to democratic norms. Of course, without the veneer of national political partisanship that national news organizations adhere to, they can also carry a greater degree of trust. That trust and responsibility can, however, be ignored or abused.

There are certainly enough examples of major publications using misleading or vague headlines to lure readers in. The Post Dispatch has plenty of company in this practice. In fact, CNN’s homepage on the morning of 4/21 has a COVID story with a headline that could possibly mislead.

Photo of a CNN article with clickbait title

In this example, the article pulls a reader in because vaccines are currently mired in partisan controversy despite the scientific evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are extremely effective and remarkably safe. This article utilizes the public controversy to its benefit, ideally bringing in vaccine skeptics who wish to prove their viewpoint while simultaneously intriguing people who already view vaccines as safe. After all, if you see “concerning” next to “Covid-19 vaccine demand”, it raises some questions. While this headline might be dangerous, perhaps that is only the case on the margins. There are much more dangerous examples and this headline likely does nothing beside reinforce existing beliefs.

Advertisements

Any action that reduces vaccine trust and subsequent demand puts the public at risk. There have now been over 560,000 deaths resulting from COVID-19 in the United States, with a total of 31 million infections. That puts the death rate from COVID-19 at approximately 1.8%. Of course, many skeptics suggest that a 98% survival rate makes the U.S. response COVID-19 nothing more than an overreaction, but this death rate is simultaneously incredibly high still and not the full story. There are often lingering effects ranging in severity for COVID survivors.

“Nearly one-third of people with COVID-19 had lingering symptoms a median of 6 months after infection onset”

Judy George, MedpageToday

The study also suggested that people who experience these long-lasting symptoms may face ranging effects from fatigue to persistent loss of smell or taste. As the study notes, many of these individuals are young and otherwise healthy, indicating that even those who are at low risk of death still may well face lasting effects.

Advertisements

This is a long way of suggesting the very clear and obvious notion that the risks of getting COVID-19 on your health are substantially – almost unbelievably – higher than any risks from the vaccine. There are now over 86 million fully vaccinated individuals in the U.S. alone, and there have been some cases where fully vaccinated individuals get sick. The number, as of last week, was 5800 – a miniscule 0.006% of those fully vaccinated. We already knew the vaccines were not 100% effective, but these numbers suggest that they are even MORE effective than the numbers initially suggested. Of those infected post-vaccination, only 74 died. That means that your odds of being infected post-vaccination and dying are 0.00008%.

The Post Dispatch, however, went a full step further than CNN with a headline on April 19 that could fundamentally harm vaccine trust and increase hesitancy. Any person who subsequently choose to not get vaccinated puts their lives at significantly higher risk and damages the public health and potential for herd immunity for the entire region.

This headline is simple and impactful. Writing only that “71 in St. Louis County test positive for COVID-19 after full vaccination” leaves more questions than answers. Most of those questions intentionally would center around vaccine efficacy. The headline capitalizes off of vaccine concern and is the kind of material that can easily be shared as vaccine misinformation. Of course, reading the article or the very small text beneath clarifies that these cases are uncommon, but that’s not the part most people will notice.

Advertisements

In other words, the Post Dispatch is using vaccine hesitancy as a source of profit through clickbait. They are doing so at a time where vaccine demand is meeting supply, both in the region and more broadly across the United States. The effort needed to push the U.S. and the St. Louis area toward herd immunity will be gargantuan, and it will require institutional stakeholders and media doing the opposite of fear mongering for profit. If the Post Dispatch had altered its headline to include a note about vaccine safety or the unlikely chance of “breakthrough cases”, then at least it could have been neutral.

Users on social media were quick to call this headline “irresponsible”, noting just how difficult it has been to coordinate a coherent public health response with a skeptical public. Giving material to conspiracy theorists who do not trust vaccines is certainly not helpful for beneficial for anything but their bottom line. But, as should be expected, evoking anger and anxiety leads to more clicks.

While there is certainly an argument to be made about the unhealthy connection between news media, particularly local news, and capitalism, that is not the point of this article even as it should still be explored. While local news can be instrumental for the health of a region through exposing corruption and informing the public, staff writers need to make enough to support themselves and the infrastructure of a print-media organization doesn’t come cheap either. Even here at Missouri-Metro, we use ads to pay for the site infrastructure. You’ve probably seen a few in this article alone.

Advertisements

Of course, while we should be rooting for the success of the Post Dispatch and hoping for its staff to shape a positive presence in the region, neither their headline writers, editors, or Editorial Board seem particularly interested in doing so.

On the heels of Mayor Jones’ victory on April 6, a dramatic electoral shift we covered here, the Editorial Board at the St. Louis Post Dispatch quickly released a number of articles that showcased some extreme racial insensitivities and cognitive distortions.

The first dropped on April 8th, titled “Editorial: New Mayor, same jail crisis. Someone needs to convey a sense of urgency.” This article, as you probably noticed, similarly uses clickbait to lead the reader to incorrect conclusions. Of Course, Mayor Jones would not even be inaugurated for another 12 days and was still building her transition team following an electoral victory just 2 days prior. The headline is written to direct the reader to the conclusion that Mayor Jones had already been slacking on her job. It does not use the correct term for her position, which at the time was simply Mayor-Elect, not the actual St. Louis Mayor.

Advertisements

While the article brings up valid concerns about how the city must address its jail crisis, it does so first by tearing down the city’s first Black woman Mayor 12 days before she’d even hold the role. The Editorial Board goes on to suggest that Mayor-Elect Jones’ plan to close the “workhouse” jail will just make the current situation worse at the Downtown jail.

That may or may not be true, but the article suggests that then Mayor-Elect Jones lacked a sense of “urgency” on the matter, using a loaded term that suggests a lack of preparedness or care. Where they could possibly reach that outcome is unclear given that Jones had released a statement about the Community Justice Center uprising the very next day.

In her statement, she addresses the very concerns noted about locks and conditions that the Editorial Board unceremoniously roasts her for not considering. They also give no airtime to the reason why Jones and other city progressives are looking to close the “workhouse” jail, simply chocking it up to adopting “the mantra of progressive activists”. However, this position completely talks down the importance of the various reasons progressives and others are seeking changes to the city’s jail and criminal justice systems. The average inmate at the Community Justice Center spends 344 days behind bars before their trial. The city’s other jail, known as the “workhouse” has an international reputation as a “modern-day debtors’ prison” full of black mold and rats.

Simply ignoring these horrendous conditions that predominantly impact the Black community in St. Louis, while writing off the preparedness and care for the issue of the city’s first Black Mayor, is not a good luck. 90% of those imprisoned at the workhouse are Black, and evidently their conditions are of little importance to the Editorial Board.

Advertisements

In another April 8th piece, titled “Editorial: Jones must employ deft diplomacy to build bridges with those she has attacked”, the Editorial Board nullifies Jones’ regional relationships, diplomatic capability, and the validity of her entire campaign and the platform she ran on. Ignoring that the Post Dispatch Editorial Board endorsed her opponent, Cara Spencer, who ran on a fairly similar progressive platform, these claims should be validated if they bother to make them.

In one example of Jones’ supposedly having a tenuous relationship of those she must work with, the Editorial Board bring up Police Union head Jeff Roorda. Jones did in fact say that Roorda would not have a seat at her table, but Spencer also called for the very same thing. The Board calls this an example of Jones’ “vengeful tendencies”, but if that was the case, why is the same not applied to her opponents or most progressive St. Louis politicians? Moreover, why use Roorda at all when he lobbed insults at Jones like “laziest-legislator-of-all-time”, “cop-hater” and “race-baiter”. Despite his herculean efforts to appose police reforms, his own actions get no airtime with the Post Dispatch Editorial Board in this piece.

If the Editorial Board took the time to write a whole piece about her broken relationships, then there must be other examples, right? The only others mentioned are the Board of Aldermen, Board of Estimate and Apportionment, and the city bureaucracy itself. Perhaps there is some distrust between the Aldermen and the Mayor as that usually tends to be the case. It is not as though Mayor Krewson always got along with the legislative body. In fact Krewson was steadfastly in favor of Board reduction, a position that did not gain much favor with many Aldermen. Moreover, she had a tenuous relationship with the more progressive members of the legislative body.

Advertisements

So where does Mayor Jones stand with these important relationships? Board of Alderman President Lewis Reed promised to endorse Jones if he did not proceed to the runoff, as would end up being the case. She already has his support, but what about the rest of the Board? With the success of the #FlipTheBoard and the newly dominant progressive majority on the Board, Jones has a rare opportunity to make progress on her progressive agenda. Jones had a full 14 current members endorse her run, versus just 4 for Spencer.

On the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, made up of just 3 elected officials including the Mayor, Board of Aldermen President, and Comptroller, Jones has similarly strong relationships. With Reed’s former endorsement and a strong statement of support by Comptroller Green, there seems to be far less strife than the Editorial Board would suggest.

With little real support for their strangely mean-spirited claims of poor diplomacy and relationships, the Board ends their piece with claims that Jones cannot be trusted with the $500 million windfall coming from the Federal Government and that her victory is anything but a mandate. They suggest that the money is not “solely hers to spend as she likes”, as though Jones had ever suggested that it would be. Rather, she has adopted a community input plan for the funds alongside a promise to “work with the Board of Estimate and Apportionment and Board of Aldermen to appropriate stimulus funds”.

Advertisements

The Editorial Board falls victim to stereotypes about Black people that are still woefully common to see today. It’s a common stereotype that Black Americans just don’t know how to manage their money, or that they cannot be trusted with their finances. There is a rather good explanation on this stereotype here that I recommend you take a few minutes to read. Regardless, it is evident that the Post Dispatch Editorial Board simply does not trust Jones to uphold her responsibility even though the voters widely adopted her as their new Mayor. Even that victory is downplayed, with her majority 52% support not counting as mandate to the Editorial Board.

We’ve covered just how important the role of local media can be for cities. Here in St. Louis, the responsibility is even greater. With historic levels of violence, the COVID-19 pandemic, a State Government that seems intent on neutering big city agendas, and politicians who need to be held accountable, there is certainly enough material. Yet, instead of utilizing the very real issues responsibly, the Post Dispatch utilizes racial tropes and stereotypes to further false narratives. They also use fear mongering and misdirection through clickbait, influencing potentially deadly behaviors and sowing distrust in the most important public health battle of our generation.

Where did the Post Dispatch take this turn toward racism and irresponsibility? That will be important to explore, and even more important will be the necessity of resolving these issues to resume and correct its important role in our society. For now, it is incumbent on readers to beware of its recent tendencies and to demand better from what can and should be one of our greatest assets.

Advertisements

Mayor-Elect Jones to be Inaugurated Tuesday as STL Experiences Dramatic Political Shift

In one of the biggest electoral shifts in St, Louis’ history, Mayor-Elect Tishaura Jones and multiple progressive Aldermanic candidates changed the entire political dynamic of the city. Mayor-Elect Jones defeated Alderwoman Cara Spencer with 51.68% of the vote compared to Spencer’s 47.77%. The April 6 election also had nearly 30% voter turnout – a significantly higher percentage than the March primary’s 22%. Contrary to some opinions that have spread online to varying degrees that suggest this was a low-turnout election, 30% voter turnout is significantly higher than average for municipal elections.

Jones will be the first Black female Mayor of St. Louis in the city’s long history, and only the second woman to be Mayor following Mayor Lyda Krewson. Her win is also unique in that she carried significant, majority support not just in the overall percentage but also in terms of the various North City Wards and even some in the Central and Southern Wards. Due to the changes recently adopted through Prop D’s Approval Voting mechanism, Jones and Spencer faced off with no other contenders in the April election. Jones, as a result, carried a majority of the voters unlike previous elections where the winner generally only received a plurality.

Mayor-Elect Tishaura Jones and her Campaign Team/Volunteers holding yard signs posing for a photo.

Mayor-Elect Tishaura Jones and Campaign Volunteers

Source: https://www.tishaura4mayor.com/meettishaura

Advertisements

With a voter mandate at her side, Mayor-Elect Jones also has considerable wind in her sail powered by a strengthening progressive Aldermanic coalition. Progressives across the city had commendable electoral showings, with the #FlipTheBoard movement claiming 4 out of 5 Aldermanic targets. Led by Alderwoman Megan Green, #FlipTheBoard intended to create a more progressive majority on the Board of Aldermen, making it theoretically easier to pass more progressive legislation. In St. Louis City, the Board of Aldermen holds the majority of the policy and legislative power, meaning that whatever Mayor holds the executive office also needs to rely on a BOA that shares similar goals.

Due to COVID-19, the inauguration will be physically limited with attendance capped to only a few guests at City Hall. The ceremony will begin at noon, however, and will be available to stream via YouTube for all who would like to watch. If you are interested in attending in person, the third and fourth floors in the rotunda will be available until they reach max capacity. You can stream the inauguration below and witness the historic ceremony.

In the short time between the April 6 election and the April 20 inauguration, Mayor-Elect Jones has been working to build her Transition Team and build her future executive staff. The Transition Team includes many St. Louis activists and policy experts, including:

  • Les Bond, chief executive officer of Attucks Asset Management, LLC
  • Jared Boyd, chief of staff and counsel of the St. Louis City Treasurer’s Office 
  • Rodney Boyd, partner with Nexus Group 
  • Patrick R. Brown, former chief of staff in St. Louis Mayor’s Office and community development executive with Ameren Missouri
  • Nancy E. Cross, former vice-president of SEIU Local 1 
  • Nahuel Fefer, Justice Catalyst Fellow at ArchCity Defenders and former senior advisor in St. Louis Mayor’s Office 
  • Bob Fox, retired business owner
  • Sandra M. Moore, managing director and chief impact officer with Advantage Capital 
  • Rosetta Okohson-Reb, managing partner and chief executive officer of MO Political Consulting 
  • Kayla M. Reed, executive director of Action St. Louis 
  • Blake Strode, executive director of ArchCity Defenders  
  • Mike Talboy, former Missouri state representative and director of governmental affairs of Burns & McDonnell  
Advertisements

For other positions available in the Jones Administration, visit her Transition Website here.

While Jones works to build her team, she is also seeking input from the community for how her Administration should spend the $517 million that St. Louis City will be receiving from the Federal Government. Her immediate plans prioritize direct relief for those most impacted by COVID-19. Her plan can be viewed here, but include key provisions like Emergency Shelter & Rapid Re-Housing, Small Business Grants, and Rental, Mortgage & Utility Assistance. Jones has released a survey for those interested in sharing their input regarding how the funds should be spent on her website as well.

Advertisements

St. Louis City is a notoriously difficult city to lead. In its “Weak-Mayor System”, the executive often finds their plans stymied by a Board of Aldermen not too keen on pursuing those same goals or the lack of a voter mandate. Mayor-Elect Jones, however, finds herself in a different position entirely. With majority support through St. Louis’ new Approval Voting system, St. Louis’ general shift toward progressive policy solutions, a significantly more progressive BOA, and support that extends far beyond only North City wards, Jones might find success in ways previous Mayors have not.

There is no doubt that the job will still be incredibly difficult. Leading a city scarred by COVID-19, centuries of institutional racism, uneven opportunity, and doing it all while simultaneously combatting a State Government that generally targets St. Louis area policies will be no walk in the park. However, Jones has real opportunity, perhaps a historic chance to steer the city towards equity and solutions for all, including those who have been hardest hit not just through COVID, but throughout the city’s long-lasting history of racist policies.

St. Louis, welcome to the next era in politics.

Article Header Source: https://www.facebook.com/tishaurajones/photos/a.10151108430063013/10159643492768013

Here’s what’s on the Ballot for St. Louis’ April 6 General Election

When St. Louis City voters wake up on April 6, they will have the opportunity to cast their ballots in the first Approval Voting runoff in the city’s history. On the ballot are two progressive women vying for Mayor, a multiple propositions including the City’s Earnings Tax that makes up 36% of its revenue, and many Aldermanic races that could determine what policy looks like over the next several years.

Mayoral Candidates

For Mayor, voters can choose between Treasurer Tishaura Jones and Alderwoman Cara Spencer. Both candidates have detailed policy platforms that lean more on the progressive side, versus fellow Democratic candidate Lewis Reed who was more centrist and did not make it to the runoff. Both Jones and Spencer have debated each other multiple times, and their most recent KSDK debate is below.

Advertisements

Unique to this election is that both Jones and Spencer are the two most “approved” Mayoral candidates of those who were on the primary ballot in March. St. Louis is the second U.S. city to adopt Approval Voting, and the theory behind its adoption is that the ultimate winner and both candidates who proceed to the runoff are the actual favorite candidates of the most voters.

In a normal election in other cities or previously in St. Louis, typically there might be two politically opposite candidates, or voters may instead choose a “lesser of two evils” candidate to avoid their worst option. Rather, in this election, voters can achieve a superior outcome if they vote honestly. We have a video explaining this process below.

Advertisements

Propositions

Of course, there are many other choices that voters will make on April 6. Propositions E, Y, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 may have sizable impacts on the city, its services, and its budget.

Proposition E, which represents the renewal of the Earnings Tax if passed, would continue the 1% income tax on all STL residents and employees who work in the city. These funds make up over 36% of the city’s funds, ranging from fire protection to roads and critical social support services. Missouri-Metro has a opinion article in favor of supporting the Earnings Tax here.

Advertisements
May be an image of text that says 'MSD cleat wastewater + stormwater'
MSD Logo

Proposition Y is proposed by MSD, the Metropolitan Sewer District, to issue $500,000,000 in sewer revenue bonds. According to MSD, these bonds are “For the purpose of designing, constructing, improving, renovating, repairing, replacing, and equipping new and existing MSD sewer and draining facilities and systems…”. If you are unsure how issuing bonds on large public works projects works, you can read more about issuing bonds here.

Propositions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 also reflect changes to the city’s charter in relation to the Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD).

Proposition 1, if adopted, would be less controversial than others. It would modernize certain language and provisions, reflecting current names of city institutions and adding language that is more inclusive to different identities.

Proposition 2 would change the how the MSD Board votes on certain provisions. MSD summarizes this proposition on its website below as:

  • Current Charter requires yes votes from a minimum of 2 Board Members from each appointing authority, the City and County, to pass any ordinance, rule, etc.
    • a. New rule: If 5 present and with unanimous consent, any 4 yes votes will suffice for passage
  • Ordinances shall take effect immediately
Advertisements

Proposition 3 is related to the Rate Commission and transparency on Rate Reports. It would, according to the ballot language, ensure that the rate is fair and reasonable to all users of MSD. As summarized by MSD:

  • Clarifies Rate Commission voting delegates and timeline.
  • Requires consideration of financial impact on all classes of ratepayers to determine a fair and reasonable burden.

Proposition 4 clarifies that a trustee at MSD would earn $25 a day they serve the Board at a Public Safety Meeting. Additionally, members of the Civil Service Commission also would earn $25 a day they serve on the Board. For both, the maximum yearly earnings would be $625.

Finally, Proposition 5 would allow MSD to utilize the same auditing firm for longer than 5 consecutive years if MSD conducts a fair and competitive bidding process and the lead audit partner is changed.

Aldermanic Candidates

STL City Hall – Google Maps

Candidates in most of the city’s 28 Wards are running in some very competitive elections. With the city tilting generally more toward the progressive end of the political spectrum in recent elections from U.S. Representative Cori Bush to its most “approved” candidates in the March 2 runoffs, incumbents are facing some tough challenges.

With so many Wards, there are too many candidates to delve into. However, we will include their websites when applicable below and display the various candidates facing off in each Ward.

Ward 1Yolanda BrownSharon Tyus
Ward 3Herdosia Kalambayi BentumBrandon Bosley
Ward 4Dwinderlin (Dwin) EvansEdward McFowland
Ward 5James PageTammika Hubbard
Ward 7Jack CoatarShedrick (Nato Caliph) Kelley
Ward 9Dan GuentherKen A. Ortmann
Ward 11Sarah Wood MartinUncontested
Ward 12Vicky GrassBill Stephens
Ward 13Beth MurphyAnne Schweitzer
Ward 15Megan Ellyia GreenJennifer Florida
Ward 17Michelle SherodTina (Sweet-T) Pihl
Ward 19Marlene E. DavisCleo Willis, Sr.
Ward 21John Collins-MuhammadLaura Keys
Ward 23Joseph A. Vaccaro, Jr.Uncontested
Ward 25Shane CohnUncontested
Ward 27Chris CarterPamela Boyd
Advertisements

Board of Education

There are also many choices available for the St. Louis Board of Education, which will be of increased importance as the public school system faces challenges maintaining its enrollment and facilities. Voters may opt for up to 3 candidates. Each elected member will serve for 4 consecutive years. Although we included every candidate on the ballot in the list below, please be advised that candidate Bill Haas passed away. A very controversial figure in the St. Louis political sphere, Haas was known for his many candidacies and, by others, abusive messages. The St. Louis Post Dispatch covers Haas here.

William (Bill) Haas
David L. Jackson, Jr.
Natalie Vowell
J.L. Mendoza Quinones
Daffney Moore
Antoinette (Toni) Cousins
Emily Hubbard
David Merideth
Alisha Sonnier
Matt Davis
Advertisements

Comptroller

Darlene Green
Comptroller Darlene Green

The last race that voters will see on this ballot is for Comptroller, which is essentially the city’s Chief Financial Officer. The current incumbent, Darlene Green, is running for reelection and does not have an opponent. The Comptroller can audit city departments and ensure that funds and resources are utilized as planned.

How to Vote

Polling stations open tomorrow, April 6, at 6AM and will stay open until 7PM. It is important to remember that if you are in line at your polling location at the time the location closes, you will still be allowed to cast your vote. Do not leave the line if there is one.

If you do not know where your polling place is, you can find your polling place through the St. Louis Board of Elections.

To view the Sample Ballot, click here.

Advertisements

St. Louis City’s First Foray With ‘Approval Voting’ Begins March 2nd

St. Louis City is poised to have its first municipal election utilizing ‘Approval Voting‘, a method of voting that voters overwhelmingly adopted in November 2020 with the passing of Proposition D. Tomorrow’s March 2nd municipal primary election will be the first time St. Louis voters get to vote for more than one candidate for a given office. St. Louis is one of the first U.S. cities to adopt such a measure, with Fargo being the first just under a year ago.

Advertisements

While voters are used to choosing a single candidate, the city’s new voting system passes with Proposition D allows voters to choose multiple candidates that they approve of. There is still a primary and a general election, with the primary taking place March 2nd and the general/runoff on April 6th, but the candidates in the runoff will no longer represent the top candidate from either party.

Missouri-Metro & Forest Park Southeast Neighborhood Association Video on Approval Voting

Instead, Proposition D has instituted nonpartisan Approval Voting, which seeks to create more opportunity for different ideas and parties to gain momentum and make an impact on elections usually dominated by the two-party system. Moreover, the new system is intended to better reflect actual voting preferences. Proponents of Approval Voting explain that under the more traditional ‘Plurality Voting’ method utilized in most of the U.S. and formerly in St. Louis, voters often chose the “lesser of two evils” rather than their most preferred candidate. The reasoning behind doing so rested in seeking to prevent your worst case scenario rather than improving the chances for your favorite candidate.

“Approval voting gives voters more power by allowing them to select all the candidates they wish, avoiding issues with vote-splitting, spoiler candidates, and strategic voting. Many political scientists believe it is a very representative system.”

https://stlapproves.org/faq

Just how does Approval Voting supposedly better reflect real preferences? On the March 2nd primary ballot, voters will not see party identifications, despite each candidate (at least in the Mayoral race) publicly tying themselves to a party. Moreover, and perhaps the most significant difference to St. Louisans, is that voters may vote, or “approve”, of as many candidates as they like on tomorrow’s ballot.

A sample ballot wherein a STL voter would “Approve” of every Mayoral candidate on March 2nd

The top two “approved” candidates, which are intended to reflect voters’ real interests, then would advance to the general election runoff on April 6, where only two candidates for a given seat will face off. Proponents of Approval Voting suggest that the top two candidates who make it to the runoff in April will have broader support than candidates who squeak by on a plurality.

The list of candidates for the March 2 primary can be found via St. Louis city here. Polls are open from 6AM to 7PM, and you can find your polling place here.

Advertisements
Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: