I'm not quite sure why this should be possible.

Yes, you can remove your close votes prior to the question actually getting closed but - in my mind at least - there's no reason you should be able to unilaterally reopen a question by rescinding one of the close votes that got the question closed in the first place after it's closed.

This would be the same thing as asking to remove your vote for a candidate in an election after the votes had been tallied and the winners announced. Once the decision is finalized, the votes are locked in.

And, to be clear, this can happen for a variety of reasons, not only because one (or more) voters misjudged the question. It can happen frequently when someone leaves guidance for how to fix a question, it gets edited, but still gets closed. Yes, it makes sense to ensure a good quality question can be reopened easily, but having one person rescind a vote after the question is closed seems like something that could lead to a lot of confusion.

Think about the experience of the asker if you rescind the question, it gets reopened, put back in review with four close votes (or 2 on some sites), and then 10 minutes later gets another close vote and is closed again... yes, you've made it possible in the short term for you to write an answer (if you caught it in that 10 minute period) but the answerer has now had their question seemingly bounced back and forth between closed and open several times without much explanation of why.

By requiring the question to be reopened with a clean slate, we reduce the likelihood of that ping-pong effect. I think this is better for the asker in most cases.

If you feel the question should be reopened, please, do vote to reopen it and edit it to make it clear that it's not close-worthy and maybe even seek out help in getting it reopened - many meta sites allow discussions of "why was this question closed" - so feel free to start one if you feel strongly.

I'm not quite sure why this should be possible.

Yes, you can remove your close votes prior to the question actually getting closed but - in my mind at least - there's no reason you should be able to unilaterally reopen a question by rescinding one of the close votes that got the question closed in the first place after it's closed.

This would be the same thing as asking to remove your vote for a candidate in an election after the votes had been tallied and the winners announced. Once the decision is finalized, the votes are locked in.

And, to be clear, this can happen for a variety of reasons, not only because one (or more) voters misjudged the question. It can happen frequently when someone leaves guidance for how to fix a question, it gets edited, but still gets closed. Yes, it makes sense to ensure a good quality question can be reopened easily, but having one person rescind a vote after the question is closed cause the question to reopen seems like something that could lead to a lot of confusion.

Think about the experience of the asker if you rescind your close vote, it gets reopened, put back in review with four close votes (or 2 on some sites), and then 10 minutes later gets another close vote and is closed again... yes, you've made it possible in the short term for you to write an answer (if you caught it in that 10 minute period) but the answerer has now had their question seemingly bounced back and forth between closed and open several times without much explanation of why.

By requiring the question to be reopened with a clean slate, we reduce the likelihood of that ping-pong effect. I think this is better for the asker in most cases.

If you feel the question should be reopened, please, do vote to reopen it and edit it to make it clear that it's not close-worthy and maybe even seek out help in getting it reopened - many meta sites allow discussions of "why was this question closed" - so feel free to start one if you feel strongly.