[EM] A rant about IRV and it's recent history in Alaska.

[Michael Garman]

FairVote has recently updated its messaging guidance to explicitly change
the verbiage from “eliminate” to “reduce”

On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 7:55 AM John T Whelan <john.whelan at astro.rit.edu>
wrote:

> That, like RB-J's original statement, is something of an
> oversimplification.  Yes, Peltola was the Condorcet winner in the 2022
> general (when she had the advantage of incumbency) and Begich was the
> Condorcet winner in 2024 (when the electorate in general shifted to the
> right compared to 2020 and 2022).  Ultimately, the fundamental fact remains
> that FairVote claims IRV eliminates the spoiler effect, when it's been
> demonstrated twice now that this is only true until the "spoiler" has
> enough support to eliminate the Condorcet winner before the final round.
>
> This assessment is independent of the fact that I personally would rather
> see Peltola in that seat than Begich.
>
> JTW
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Election-Methods <election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com> on
> behalf of Michael Garman <michael.garman at rankthevote.us>
> Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2024 12:38 AM
> To: Greg Dennis
> Cc: election-methods at lists.electorama.com
> Subject: Re: [EM] A rant about IRV and it's recent history in Alaska.
>
> Because rb-j is an intellectually dishonest crank who doesn’t want to be
> confused by facts after he’s made up his mind
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 12:35 AM Greg Dennis <greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org
> <mailto:greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org>> wrote:
> Why leave out the November 2022 election where Peltola was the Condorcet
> winner against Begich?
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 4:46 PM robert bristow-johnson <
> rbj at audioimagination.com<mailto:rbj at audioimagination.com>> wrote:
> This is what we've learned from the 2-year history of Ranked-Choice Voting
> in Alaska.
>
> The Instant-Runoff Voting method of RCV failed in Alaska August 2022 at
> everything that RCV is supposed to do for us (as it also did in [Burlington
> Vermont 2009](
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jIhFQfEoxSdyRz5SqEjZotbVDx4xshwM/view)).
>
> Essentially, it was a spoiled election with all the bad things that come
> with a spoiled election.  In August 2022, Sarah Palin was a loser whose
> presence in the race materially changed who the winner was.  Had Palin not
> run, Begich would meet Peltola in the final round and defeat Peltola.  (We
> know this from the [tallies](
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y32bPVmq6vb6SwnMn6vwQxzoJfvrv6ID/view)
> from the Cast Vote Record.)
>
> The definition of a Spoiler is a loser whose presence in the race
> materially changes who the winner is.
>
> So then these voters for the spoiler, Palin, they find out that their
> second-choice vote was never counted.  Their favorite candidate was
> defeated and their second-choice vote was never counted.  If just 1 out of
> 13 of the Palin voters that marked Begich as their lesser evil (there were
> 34089 of them); if about 2600 of these voters voted tactically (the tactic
> is called "compromising") and marked their lesser-evil (Begich) as their
> first-choice vote, then Begich would have met Peltola in the final round
> and beaten Peltola.
>
> They were promised that it was safe to vote for their favorite, Sarah
> Palin, but by doing so they caused the election of Mary Peltola.  But they
> prevented Begich from having a head-to-head with Peltola because Palin did
> instead and lost.
>
> There were about 112000 voting GOP and 75000 Dem.  The GOP vote was split
> and RCV promised that it would resolve the split vote correctly, but it
> didn't.  IRV propped up the *weaker* of the two GOP candidates against
> Peltola and that candidate lost.  If, instead, RCV had put Begich up
> against Peltola, Begich would have won.
>
> They were promised that RCV would let them vote their hopes, not their
> fears.  But they would have been better off voting their fears.  They were
> promised their second-choice vote would count if their favorite candidate
> couldn't get elected but that second-choice vote was never counted for
> these Palin voters.
>
> More Alaskans, 87899 to 79461 (an 8438 voter margin), preferred Begich to
> Peltola and marked their ballots saying so.  But Mary Peltola was elected
> instead.
>
> This November, again, more Alaskan voters marked their ballots that Begich
> is preferred to Peltola by nearly the same margin, 8354 (164117 to 155763).
>
> Both times about 8000 more Alaskans said they would prefer Begich over
> Peltola to go to Washington and represent the state.  And, both times,
> Alaskan voters marked their ballots saying so.  Both times, Instant-Runoff
> Voting was used.
>
> What was different?
>
> Sarah Palin was in the race in 2022 and not in the race in 2024.  And
> different winners resulted.
>
>
> --
>
> r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com<mailto:
> rbj at audioimagination.com>
>
> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
>
> .
> .
> .
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list
> info
>
>
> --
> Greg Dennis, Ph.D. :: Policy Director
> Voter Choice Massachusetts
>
> e :: greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org<mailto:greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org>
> p :: 617.835.9161<tel:617.835.9161>
> w :: voterchoicema.org<https://www.voterchoicema.org/>
>
> :: Follow us on Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/yeson2rcv> and Twitter<
> https://twitter.com/yeson2rcv> ::
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list
> info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20241205/88f8251f/attachment.htm>