[EM] [instantrunoff] plurality isn't so bad

[Jeremy Friesner]

> I know it contradicts a core assumption of many
> members of this group, but plurality winners aren't
> always so terrible.

That's true, but it's missing the point.  Sure, it's always possible 
for a country to "get lucky" -- even some dictatorships have been 
benevolent and provided good leadership.  The real question isn't 
whether the system ever elects anyone decent, but rather how good
it is at representing the will of the electorate.  By that measure,
plurality elections do very poorly -- any time more than two candidates
are running in an election, the election's results get distorted by spoiler
effects that are artifacts of the system and don't represent
the will of the voters.

-Jeremy