[EM] Why I prefer ranked-choice voting to approval voting

robert bristow-johnson rbj at audioimagination.com
Sat Oct 15 11:49:43 PDT 2016

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------

Subject: Re: [EM] Why I prefer ranked-choice voting to approval voting

From: "Michael Ossipoff" <email9648742 at gmail.com>

Date: Sat, October 15, 2016 2:32 pm

To: "Jeff O'Neill" <jeff.oneill at opavote.com>

election-methods at electorama.com


> Jeff:


> My reply was mostly to your justification of your lesser-evil voting.


> As for IRV, it can be said more simply:


> IRV was repealed in Burlington because it violated majority wishes. The

> Democrat it eliminated was someone who was majority-preferred to everyone

> else.


> A majority consisting of Democrats & Republicans wanted the Democrat

> instead of the Progressive.


> That's what the Republicans thought that they were ensuring when they

> ranked the Democrat in 2nd place:

which essentially punished the GOP Prog-haters for voting sincerely.  despite the (false) promise that they could vote for their favorite candidate without fear of helping elect their least favorite candidate.


> No voting-system can guarantee that the CWs will always win.
well, if there **is** a CW, any Condorcet method will guarantee that the CW wins.
all of this differentiation between sincere CW and just CW is really too difficult because we cannot open people's cranium and peer inside
to see what their sincere vote is.  i think the only reasonable assumption is that, with sufficient *credible* assurance (that tactical voting will not help their political interest any more than sincere voting) that all ballots are sincerely marked.

> But the better methods, like Approval, Score & Bucklin, gjve hir a better

> chance than IRV did in Burlington.
of course, a Condorcet method will do better than any of those.  why bother with something non-Condorcet if the target is electing the CW?  i don't get it.
and direct comparisons cannot be made.  Approval collects too little data
compared to a Ranked Ballot and Score forces the voter to concoct and yield too much data.  it can only be compared if the ballot format is the same.  so different RCV methods can be direct compared.  but comparing methods with different ballots requires assumptions to be

> IRV gave the win elsewhere in a way that the people in Burlington rightly

> perceived as arbitrary.
not "arbitrary" but incorrect.

> For one thing, Approval, Score, & Bucklin allow the CWs's preferrers a

> better chance to protect hir win, to not give it away.
and Ranked Pairs of Schulze allow an even better chance.
r b-j                  rbj at audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20161015/2002da49/attachment.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list