[EM] Poll on voting-systems, to inform voters in upcoming enactment-elections

[robert bristow-johnson]

> On 04/05/2024 4:14 PM EDT James Gilmour <jamesgilmour at f2s.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> If you are electing a president or a mayor, you will use a single-winner election method.
> 
> If you are electing a "representative assembly" like a parliament or town council, you would use (should use) a multi-winner election method.  Only be using a multi-winner method can you begin to ensure that the elected assembly is properly representative of those who voted.
> 

I'm in complete agreement with this.  This is why I advocate a Condorcet-consistent method for single winner.  There is no proportionality to be had.  So majority rule is all that's left to make our votes count equally.

For multiwinner methods, I am still not sure what's best, but I'm leaning toward some variant of Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method.  Fractional votes are a bitch.

A third application of RCV being advocated in legislatures is for Presidential Primary races where each state is allocated a given number of delegate seats for the national convention of whatever party (right now there is just Democrat and Republican in the U.S. that have state primaries) and the question is how many delegates to award to each presidential candidate based on the vote they receive.  In that application I would suggest STV and eliminate lessor candidates one at a time until, of the candidates that remain, each meets the quota.  Then allocate the number of delegates to each presidential candidate using the Huntington-Hill method.

Three completely different applications of the ranked ballot in elections administered by governments.  Three different goals, all for the purpose of representing our votes equally.  And three different methods.

--

r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

.
.
.