notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

I can think of one use for weighted voting -- for corporate votes such as electing a board of directors where your vote is directly proportional to your ownership in the company.

We keep hearing about how the voting machines have this capability, but nothing about whether or not anyone actually used this in an election. If they are going to keep claiming that the capability is evidence of fraud, they need to prove that it was actually being used in the election. Without such proof, it's just sour grapes.

BoerneAg11 said:

---

So Rudy was comparing primary ballots mailed to general election ballots returned?

Gd what a moron.

---

You sure about that? I'd say he achieved what they set out to accomplish. Don't think you can call him a moron.

eric76 said:

---

notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

I can think of one use for weighted voting -- for corporate votes such as electing a board of directors where your vote is directly proportional to your ownership in the company.

We keep hearing about how the voting machines have this capability, but nothing about whether or not anyone actually used this in an election. If they are going to keep claiming that the capability is evidence of fraud, they need to prove that it was actually being used in the election. Without such proof, it's just sour grapes.

---

In a government election whether national or home owner's association, votes are integer values.

The fact that integer values are not used to tally votes is indicates either negligence or fraud. Either of which places doubt on the election integrity.

If weighted voting is used for another purpose, as you suggest, then they should call a different subroutine that might use floating point numbers.

BuddysBud said:

---

eric76 said:

---

notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

I can think of one use for weighted voting -- for corporate votes such as electing a board of directors where your vote is directly proportional to your ownership in the company.

We keep hearing about how the voting machines have this capability, but nothing about whether or not anyone actually used this in an election. If they are going to keep claiming that the capability is evidence of fraud, they need to prove that it was actually being used in the election. Without such proof, it's just sour grapes.

---

In a government election whether national or home owner's association, votes are integer values.

The fact that integer values are not used to tally votes is indicates either negligence or fraud. Either of which places doubt on the election integrity.

If weighted voting is used for another purpose, as you suggest, then they should call a different subroutine that might use floating point numbers.

---

I think that they should use a different software package for the machines, but I can understand the desire to use one for both.

The floating point numbers are rather weird, but do not indicate anything bad.

At an engineering company where I worked, the accounting package used floating point numbers for dollar amounts. The result was that the round off errors could accumulate and so the balance sheet never exactly balanced. That used to drive the accountants nuts. They didn't care why it didn't balance exactly, but couldn't tell you which numbers were off by $1.

Using them in an election, the least significant digit would probably be off, but if you expressed it with two or more digits after the decimal point, you can mentally round it up or down as required and it should be exact.

So while I would never have written an election package with floating point numbers, I don't consider their use to indicate anything fraudulent -- just something unnecessary.

They could have used something like

#ifdef standard_election
typedef unsigned long vote_t ;
#else
typedef double vote_t ;
#endif

And so for a standard election it would use integer values instead of floats.

sail33or said:

---

These are the actual numbers reported in Pennsylvania.

How does anyone not see this glaring problem.

You sent out in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 1,823,148 absentee or mail-in ballots. You received back 1.4 million approximately. However, in the count for president, you counted 2.5 million. I don't know what accounts for the 700,000 difference between the ballots you sent out and the number of ballots that ended up in the count," said Giuliani.

---

Absolutely.

Ranked choice voting is used in many jurisdictions and countries. This is yet another example of conspiracy theorists running wild with something totally normal and has been in place for decades.

Quote:

---

Any voting system manufactured by ES&S that uses its DS-200 tabulator can be used to administer an RCV election, although it may require some modification to do so. Prior to 2013, ES&S developed the EVS 5.1.0.0 system for the RCV elections taking place in Minneapolis (MN). That system included the ability to read ranked ballots and then export all ballot data into a digital file that could be read by commercial off-the-shelf software like Microsoft Excel.

---

https://www.fairvote.org/voting_systems_and_rcv

Note just because some systems have this feature doesn't mean it was used and fractions would present in the tabulator file. The hand recount in Georgia obviously was done in intigers and confirmed the tabulator counts.

HalifaxAg said:

---

Dad-O-Lot said:

---

Eso si, Que es said:

---

Nope, nothing about math on that sign

---

---

Just add "liberalism is a disease" and "shall not be infringed" and I would buy it

---

As far as no human being illegal, I guess babies don't count.

BanderaAg956 said:

---

notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

So, when you have been dead over 50 years before the vote count you get 1/3 of a vote, 26-50 you get 1/2 a vote, 11-25 you get 3/4, and 1 day to 10 years a full vote. Then you multiply the totaled fractions by the candidate factor (x40 for Hiden and 0.10 for Trump).

---

That data comes from NYTimes and Edison and is not in any way official vote counts. Not a single Secretary of State reported votes with decimals. NYT data used algorithms to "predict" election outcomes. That data has been scraped and analyzed by "experts" who have found all sorts of anomalies. The problem is that data is not official. It's collected by a 3rd party from official sources, but those are not the official numbers. This is a common and ongoing problem with any attempts to find "evidence" of fraud by analyzing publicly available data.

It doesn't really matter though. No one is going to believe me if I am not confirming their narrative so what's the point.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claims-of-irregularities-in-nyts-edison-election-data.11450/

Well, I give up. I guess Math, Science, Doctor Statements, Video, UFO Evidence, Newscasts, Twitters, Forum Posts of Any Kind, Obituaries, COVID Cases, Basically Every Statement or Thought is 100% Political.

Everyone, believe as you like.

The Sky is Blue. I mean Trump says the sky is Blue. Have at it.

BuddysBud said:

---

eric76 said:

---

notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

I can think of one use for weighted voting -- for corporate votes such as electing a board of directors where your vote is directly proportional to your ownership in the company.

We keep hearing about how the voting machines have this capability, but nothing about whether or not anyone actually used this in an election. If they are going to keep claiming that the capability is evidence of fraud, they need to prove that it was actually being used in the election. Without such proof, it's just sour grapes.

---

In a government election whether national or home owner's association, votes are integer values.

The fact that integer values are not used to tally votes is indicates either negligence or fraud. Either of which places doubt on the election integrity.

If weighted voting is used for another purpose, as you suggest, then they should call a different subroutine that might use floating point numbers.

---

Displaying the final results in decimal is a technique to show that non-integer math has been used. with a large enough data set, even one or two digits will show up a lot of such issues.

If the programmer had simply rounded or truncated and displayed in integer values, then the fraud might have not been so obvious.

Quote:

---

Nope, nothing about math on that sign

---

And that is not an exaggeration. If it ain't touchy feely, it doesn't matter.

NEWS FLASH.

I AM BACK IN THE GAME.

I posted all of wet the bed guys stuff on my other political forums. (No offense bed guy you are really trying hard)

They say that the Pennsylvania Web Site numbers have changed. The site has gone down for unexplained reasons, etc.

Yes, Rudy was using the numbers from the website at the time and it was from the Primary, Showing the Primary was as crooked as the Presidential Election.

Also there is DIRECT evidence that (at a point in the counting) that Trump votes "DECLINED" exactly as the number of Biden votes increased. MATH. MATH. MATH.

But, as usual, nothing to see here. Move along.

CondensedFoggyAggie said:

---

Surely Rudy will provide us with how he got those numbers?

---

From the PA electors saying all that remained to count were the mail in ballots?

sail33or said:

---

NEWS FLASH.

I AM BACK IN THE GAME.

I posted all of wet the bed guys stuff on my other political forums. (No offense bed guy you are really trying hard)

They say that the Pennsylvania Web Site numbers have changed. The site has gone down for unexplained reasons, etc.

Yes, Rudy was using the numbers from the website at the time and it was from the Primary, Showing the Primary was as crooked as the Presidential Election.

Also there is DIRECT evidence that (at a point in the counting) that Trump votes "DECLINED" exactly as the number of Biden votes increased. MATH. MATH. MATH.

But, as usual, nothing to see here. Move along.

---

Rudy's quote in your OP does not mention anything about those numbers coming from the Primary.

So now some other guys on another forum have you convinced that Rudy was talking about Primary numbers all along? How very convenient. I'm sure the other stuff they told you about "Direct" evidence of Biden votes going up in correlation to Trump votes going down is similarly valid and above reproach.

FWIW, the PA primary ballot numbers have not been taken down or altered since September. Here you go: https://web.archive.org/. See for yourself.

But glad you have found an explanation you can live with for why you took Rudy's word as gospel. Rudy was actually trying to show the Primary was crooked, so he used the Primary numbers for ballot requests and then used the vote total from the General election. Makes perfect sense.

unmade bed said:

---

sail33or said:

---

NEWS FLASH.

I AM BACK IN THE GAME.

I posted all of wet the bed guys stuff on my other political forums. (No offense bed guy you are really trying hard)

They say that the Pennsylvania Web Site numbers have changed. The site has gone down for unexplained reasons, etc.

Yes, Rudy was using the numbers from the website at the time and it was from the Primary, Showing the Primary was as crooked as the Presidential Election.

Also there is DIRECT evidence that (at a point in the counting) that Trump votes "DECLINED" exactly as the number of Biden votes increased. MATH. MATH. MATH.

But, as usual, nothing to see here. Move along.

---

Rudy's quote in your OP does not mention anything about those numbers coming from the Primary.

So now some other guys on another forum have you convinced that Rudy was talking about Primary numbers all along? How very convenient. I'm sure the other stuff they told you about "Direct" evidence of Biden votes going up in correlation to Trump votes going down is similarly valid and above reproach.

FWIW, the PA primary ballot numbers have not been taken down or altered since September. Here you go: https://web.archive.org/. See for yourself.

But glad you have found an explanation you can live with for why you took Rudy's word as gospel. Rudy was actually trying to show the Primary was crooked, so he used the Primary numbers for ballot requests and then used the vote total from the General election. Makes perfect sense.

---

unmade bed said:

---

BanderaAg956 said:

---

notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

So, when you have been dead over 50 years before the vote count you get 1/3 of a vote, 26-50 you get 1/2 a vote, 11-25 you get 3/4, and 1 day to 10 years a full vote. Then you multiply the totaled fractions by the candidate factor (x40 for Hiden and 0.10 for Trump).

---

That data comes from NYTimes and Edison and is not in any way official vote counts. Not a single Secretary of State reported votes with decimals. NYT data used algorithms to "predict" election outcomes. That data has been scraped and analyzed by "experts" who have found all sorts of anomalies. The problem is that data is not official. It's collected by a 3rd party from official sources, but those are not the official numbers. This is a common and ongoing problem with any attempts to find "evidence" of fraud by analyzing publicly available data.

It doesn't really matter though. No one is going to believe me if I am not confirming their narrative so what's the point.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claims-of-irregularities-in-nyts-edison-election-data.11450/

---

The problems are 1, no SoS would be stuuupid enough to report S a decimals, and 2, the fact that the machines are capable of decimals are enough to scream unsecure election.

Mathmatix says election was legit ... and thats good enough for me.

Capt. Augustus McCrae said:

---

Good thing we have such an honest media that will hold people accountable.

---

The media cant uphold the law or arrest criminals. Trump's AGs who head the DOJ are the absolute failures that didn't hold anyone accountable.

That_Guy_Moose said:

---

Dorm 15 said:

---

Is the President's legal team being dishonest or just inept? At this point I cannot tell.

---

Those things aren't mutually exclusive.

---

You guys seem like you might be experts in both....

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

unmade bed said:

---

BanderaAg956 said:

---

notex said:

---

I still don't understand how the actual vote count had to be reported in decimals. To the hundredth. No one's even tried to explain this to me, and I've asked in various places how this could be 'ok.'

Quote:

---

Decimals in Vote Tallies
Tabulation software in use in the 2020 election in at least 28 states explicitly authorized in operating instruction manuals provided by the software vendor -- the use of weighting algorithms to tally votes.
Actual tallies in Michigan's public records show weighted numbers of votes received, showing vote tallies in fractional numbers -- e.g. a tally of 1,615,707.52 votes for candidate X and 1,925,865.66 votes for candidate Y.

These numbers are not vote total percentages for one candidate or another, which would logically include decimals. These are reports of vote totals. With decimals. There is no logical place for decimals in a system that is supposed to be counting one person, one vote. Vote counts with decimals establish that the system used algorithms. They prove the actual vote tally has been manipulated.

---

---

So, when you have been dead over 50 years before the vote count you get 1/3 of a vote, 26-50 you get 1/2 a vote, 11-25 you get 3/4, and 1 day to 10 years a full vote. Then you multiply the totaled fractions by the candidate factor (x40 for Hiden and 0.10 for Trump).

---

That data comes from NYTimes and Edison and is not in any way official vote counts. Not a single Secretary of State reported votes with decimals. NYT data used algorithms to "predict" election outcomes. That data has been scraped and analyzed by "experts" who have found all sorts of anomalies. The problem is that data is not official. It's collected by a 3rd party from official sources, but those are not the official numbers. This is a common and ongoing problem with any attempts to find "evidence" of fraud by analyzing publicly available data.

It doesn't really matter though. No one is going to believe me if I am not confirming their narrative so what's the point.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/claims-of-irregularities-in-nyts-edison-election-data.11450/

---

The problems are 1, no SoS would be stuuupid enough to report S a decimals, and 2, the fact that the machines are capable of decimals are enough to scream unsecure election.

---

That's about as silly as it would be to argue that the election is unsecure because the color of the voting machine was black.

Want to be even sillier? If you increment a floating point number by one enough times, you will get to the point that adding yet another one will not change the number. Why not complain about that?

If, on the other hand, they used a signed integer number, at some point you add 1 and it goes negative! For example, if you have 127 as an 8 bit signed integer and add 1, then you get -128.

And if you have an unsigned integer, at some point you add 1 and it goes back to 0. For an 8 bit unsigned integer, if you have a value of 255 and add 1, then you get 0.

Lots of things to complain about there. It doesn't mean that there is any merit to the complaint, though.

Whatever you say, eric.

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Whatever you say, eric.

---

What would be more interesting is if you voted in a tall building with an open window on the north side of the building and an open building on the south side of the building. To vote, they would hand you a voting machine and you would toss it out the north window if you are voting for Trump and out the south window if you are voting for Biden.

Then at the end of the day, get out a tape measure and decide which pile is deeper.

Hopefully, the entrance and exit to the building would be on either the East or the West side of the building.

The vote would be completely anonymous and could be double checked by anyone with a tape measure.

sail33or said:

---

These are the actual numbers reported in Pennsylvania.

How does anyone not see this glaring problem.

You sent out in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 1,823,148 absentee or mail-in ballots. You received back 1.4 million approximately. However, in the count for president, you counted 2.5 million. I don't know what accounts for the 700,000 difference between the ballots you sent out and the number of ballots that ended up in the count," said Giuliani.

---

If you think there was actual fraud, then take your evidence to a federal judge, any federal judge.

Quote:

---

The problems are 1, no SoS would be stuuupid enough to report S a decimals, and 2, the fact that the machines are capable of decimals are enough to scream unsecure election.

---

No it doesn't "scream" that. It screams that lot of people are just now learning how election machines work. Google ranked choice voting.

Quote:

---

Any voting system manufactured by ES&S that uses its DS-200 tabulator can be used to administer an RCV(ranked choice voting) election, although it may require some modification to do so. Prior to 2013, ES&S developed the EVS 5.1.0.0 system for the RCV elections taking place in Minneapolis (MN). That system included the ability to read ranked ballots and then export all ballot data into a digital file that could be read by commercial off-the-shelf software like Microsoft Excel.

---

https://www.fairvote.org/voting_systems_and_rcv

Quote:

---

Note just because some systems have this feature doesn't mean it was used and fractions would present in the tabulator file. The hand recount in Georgia obviously was done in intigers and confirmed the tabulator counts.

---

Maury Ballstein said:

---

Quote:

---

The problems are 1, no SoS would be stuuupid enough to report S a decimals, and 2, the fact that the machines are capable of decimals are enough to scream unsecure election.

---

No it doesn't "scream" that. It screams that lot of people are just now learning how election machines work. Google ranked choice voting.

Quote:

---

Any voting system manufactured by ES&S that uses its DS-200 tabulator can be used to administer an RCV(ranked choice voting) election, although it may require some modification to do so. Prior to 2013, ES&S developed the EVS 5.1.0.0 system for the RCV elections taking place in Minneapolis (MN). That system included the ability to read ranked ballots and then export all ballot data into a digital file that could be read by commercial off-the-shelf software like Microsoft Excel.

---

https://www.fairvote.org/voting_systems_and_rcv

Quote:

---

Note just because some systems have this feature doesn't mean it was used and fractions would present in the tabulator file. The hand recount in Georgia obviously was done in intigers and confirmed the tabulator counts.

---

---

WGAS about all that.
Votes are all equal, to 1! Period.

No kidding - we don't do ranked choice voting for president. I was just explaining why some systems have this capability.

So if a system is designed for voting, there is ZERO reasons for anything other than integers. Period.

You don't understand. There is no excuse for decimals.

Once that is part of a feature for a voting system, it is no longer secure. It is not a system designed for a U.S. election.

Except in ranked choice voting - which was already explained to you.

Just curious. Are you pulling that out of your ass, or are you bringing that stuff here from another site?

Is this your first election? Have you ever heard of ranked choice voting before? There is nothing sinister or unusual about any of this. All manufacturer's have this capability, it's not exclusive to Dominion.

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

So if a system is designed for voting, there is ZERO reasons for anything other than integers. Period.

You don't understand. There is no excuse for decimals.

Once that is part of a feature for a voting system, it is no longer secure. It is not a system designed for a U.S. election.

---

There is nothing magical about floating point numbers that would make an election less secure. It is only about the internal representation of the numbers in the computer.

its not entirely common in presidential races, https://www.fairvote.org/where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used

Quote:

---

• Basalt, Colorado: Adopted in 2002 for mayoral races with three or more candidates and first used in April 2020.
• Benton County, Oregon: Adopted in 2016 for general elections for county offices of sheriff and commissioner and was first used in November 2020.
• Berkeley, California: Adopted in 2004 and has been used since 2010 to elect the mayor, city council and city auditor.
• Cambridge, Massachusetts: In use since the 1940s in multi-winner form. Used for the nine-seat city council and the six-seat school board, both elected citywide.
• Carbondale, Colorado: Adopted in 2002 for mayoral races with three or more candidates.
• Eastpointe, Michigan: Adopted multi-winner RCV to resolve a federal Voting Rights Act lawsuit and first used in November 2019.
• Las Cruces, New Mexico: Adopted by the city council in 2018 and used since 2019 for all municipal elections.
• Maine: Adopted in 2016 and first used in 2018 for all state and federal primary elections, and all general elections for Congress. Extended to apply to the general election for president beginning in 2020 and presidential primary elections beginning in 2024.
• Minneapolis, Minnesota: Adopted in 2006 and used since 2009, in elections for 22 city offices, including mayor and city council in single-winner elections, and some multi-winner park board seats.
• Oakland, California: Adopted in 2006 and used since 2010 for a total of 18 city offices, including mayor and city council.
• Payson, Utah: A local options bill was passed in 2018, and the city opted-in for city council seats in November 2019 (at-large, winner take-all).
• Portland, Maine: Adopted in 2010 and used since 2011 for electing mayor.
• San Francisco, California: Adopted in 2002 and used since 2004 to elect the mayor, city attorney, Board of Supervisors and five additional citywide offices.
• San Leandro, California: Adopted as option in 2000 charter amendment and used since 2010 to elect the mayor and city council.
• Santa Fe, New Mexico: Adopted in 2008 and used since March 2018 for mayor, city council, and municipal judge. [url=http://www.fairvotemn.org/news/saint-louis-park-becomes-latest-us-city-adopt-ranked-choice-voting][/url]
• St. Louis Park, Minnesota: Adopted in 2018 and used since 2019 for mayor and city council races.
• St. Paul, Minnesota: Adopted in 2009 and used since 2011 to elect the mayor and city council.
• Takoma Park, Maryland: Adopted in 2006 and used since 2007 in all elections for mayor and city council.
• Telluride, Colorado: Adopted in 2008 for mayoral elections with at least three candidates. Used in 2011, 2015 and 2019.
• Vineyard, Utah: A local options bill was passed in 2018, and the city opted-in for city council seats in November 2019 (at-large, winner take-all).

---