Dark money, ambiguous verbiage, nonstop TV advertising put ranked choice over the top

Mainers got sold a bill of good on Tuesday, but it took a lot of dark, out-of-state money, less than objective treatment by the state's largest newspaper and the most egregiously confusing ballot question since Lebanon's "defund the Rescue 2 ambulance lease" referendum question of November 2014.

Let's start with the ranked-choice ballot item wording, itself. The first five words: "Do you want to reject ..." Now, I know many are already scowling because, obviously you have to be able to read to vote intelligently.

But, at the same time, remember the grade school equivalent reading ability of most Americans.

Now let's write out the whole question: "Do you want to reject the parts of a new law that would delay the use of ranked-choice voting in the election of candidates for any state or federal office until 2022, and then retain the method only if the constitution is amended by December 1, 2021, to allow ranked-choice voting for candidates in state elections?"

For a single 57-word sentence, clear as mud, right?

(Aside, now can you believe, with a question like this, there are actually people who want to give illegal immigrants, many with little or no English speaking skills, the right to vote?)

Now back to the question at hand. I know there are lots of folks who took the time to study the pros and cons, and read the articles, editorials and op-eds, but believe it or not, there are many out there that don't.

For those people, many voting after a hard day's work or while they're carrying a toddler or infant into the voting booth, they deserve clear, cogent questions that a blue-collar, high school graduate can easily understand, not a bunch of hooey or gobblygook.

The money

According to the Maine Examiner, almost all of the money for the ubiquitous television advertising touting ranked-choice came from a handful of out-of-state extreme leftists groups.

One is Katherine Gehl ($30,000), a former Obama appointee, who was a campaign bundler for the former president.

Another is nonprofit Level the Playing Field ($113,000) funded by venture capitalist Peter Ackerman. Level the Playing Field has donated money to campaigns against Republicans, the Maine Examiner reported.

Finally there's Action Now Initiative ($138,000) a leftist nonprofit that works politically with Democratic officials and also worked on increasing soda taxes in Colorado and California.

The TV advertising

Now if anybody watched TV in the past month, it was not uncommon to see back-to-back slick, rich with cartoon graphics commercials in support of ranked-choice voting. On Sunday and Monday prior to Election Day the advertising plume went on steroids, with five or six ads in a single half hour.

And the silence from the other side, the side trying to retain our one-person, one-vote system we've used for 250 years, was deafening.

Now, be you Democrat or Republican or Independent or Green, you know deep in your heart that TV advertising in most cases is a large percentage of what pushes a candidate or question over the top. That's why candidates spend millions and millions of dollars on advertising.

So for ranked choice voting to still have 46 percent in opposition in Maine voting on Tuesday is really quite remarkable.

Press was de-pressing

Lastly, the Portland Press Herald has been pushing this tangled web of a voting nightmare more than reporting on it.

Even today flush with victory, they run a headline still touting its merits, "New voting system credited for strong turnout for Maine primaries."

However, there's not one quote, paraphrase or attributed thought in the story that says turnout was strong due to having ranked choice on the ballot.

And the fact that Republicans are against it is never mentioned till the last couple of paragraphs.

Feel used?