Very informative, thanks for sharing. I have tried to explain to people who think an open primary is great,this does a good job of explaining the problem with it.

That was very well shown in the video. I didn’t want question 3 before I saw it and now I will do all I can to educate others.

I think when you co-mingle issues into one amendment its doomed to fail as if you agree with one but disagreed with the other its almost impossible to vote yes, But that’s just how I think, I error on the side of caution rather than take my chances, like the saying “Better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man get unjustly imprisoned”

The commercials for Yes on 3 are deceitful. They make no mention of the other half of the bill which is ranked choice voting. They know it’s a loser so that’s why you only here some sop about disenfranchised voters.

There is no way to do a recount if 3 goes into effect.

Vote No as this decision also changes the state constitution and would not easily be changed in the future once people realize the negative impact. As stated, the primary’s selected candidate in a party may not even make it to the general election ballot due to how convoluted this process is and the confusion it presents. There is a reason out of state Soros- backed initiatives are trying to change NV’s constitution and that of other states. This was an excellent explanation and should be broadcasted. Thanks for posting, Jan.

As usual, a proposition that is unclear, has been advertised by supporting side, inaccurately. This is ranked choice voting. It is a convoluted way to dilute the voting power of the citizenry. Open elections are one thing. That may have its merits. But to layer on the ranked choice voting, which is an open sore to take away the intent of the voting public, and put it into a ridiculous process, is heinous. This is the platform for voter fraud if there ever was one. VOTE NO ON 3. Require the options being brought to the voters are clear and straightforward, not twisted and convoluted, ripe for fraud.

It will cost tax payers $$$ and is confusing—not to mention unfair. Outsiders dumping millions to change our constitution! No!

If they had left it at just Open Primary, perhaps many may have considered it, including me. However, with Ranked Choice added to that process, it over complicates the voting process needlessly and creates many scenariors in which ballots might be discarded or rejected. And it’s for that reason that I voted no.The Hill does a great article on it. https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4613679-the-ranked-choice-voting-fad-is-finally-ending/

Jan… Excellent explanation. My grandchild, in their 20’s, now has a much better understanding of this question. I was having difficulty trying to help them understand. I hadn’t realized how confusing it could be until I had the task of trying to help someone to understand 😕 Thank you for taking the time to create and share this. 🙂

No on 3!