We use a couple of those options in Australia.
I guess what they call "ranked voting" is what we call "preferential voting". In other words, if there are four or five candidates running for a particular seat (a common situation) we can vote for them in the order we prefer them. That means that we can place a despised candidate at the end with everybody ahead of him/her.
We also have mandatory voting. All adults MUST register to vote and there is a fine for anybody who doesn't vote without a good reason. It makes certain we all turn out on polling day. I doubt that it helps. Forcing somebody to vote if they're not interested in politics and the socio-economic situation prevalent at the time is like giving the vote to a small child. We might as well place the ballot paper up on the wall and throw darts at it.
Shorter campaigns are a good idea. Even on this side of the Pacific we're getting tired of hearing all the accusations and counter-accusations between the candidates -- and that's AFTER all the other candidates were eliminated. I can't imagine how frustrating that must be in the US when your news outlets would be full of it.
The rebel in me loves the idea of "none of the above" but, in reality, it's not an option. There's going to be a winner, whether we like it or not, and our vote can help to put them there. Or keep them out.
Weekend elections work just fine here. It means that the majority of people are able to vote on their day off. Doesn't help emergency services, or retail, hospitality, and tourism workers, of course.
I like the suggestions but then, I live in a place where we're used to some of them already.
