[EM] RCV in SF Mayoral election

[Christopher Colosi]

Curious to hear people’s thoughts on some issues.

1. May not elect majority candidate
In SF, we restrict to 3 choices to simplify the process.  As the vote
currently stands, 144 votes separate the top two candidates (<0.1%) and
over 16,000 ballots have been exhausted (all 3 choices eliminated).  About
9% of voters have been removed from the pool.  It is very possible that the
result would have shifted if they had the opportunity to rank a 4th
candidate, and therefore, it is possible that we won’t elect the person who
truly represents the majority.  Is this common?  This is probably an
abnormally close race.  Thoughts?

2. What are your thoughts on London Breed’s response to being asked if RCV
is fair?  She stated “This is the system we are working with. That’s a
discussion we can have at a later time. For now, we’re stuck with it.”
- insinuating
it is not fair.  I was quite bothered to have a Dem in a progressive city
insinuate that first past the post is more fair.  It also felt divisive.
If Leno wins, will her supporters feel that democracy prevailed, or that
the election was stolen?  She also presents herself as a minority candidate
and it is my understanding that RCV gives minority candidates better
chances and causes all candidates to be more likely to campaign to minority
communities.  Am I mistaken?  Are there any legitimate arguments that FPTP
can be more fair?  Thoughts?

Regards,
—Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20180608/f72018ce/attachment.html>