[EM] No. Condorcet and Hare do not share the same problem with computational complexity and process transparency.

[robert bristow-johnson]

> On 03/20/2024 2:04 PM EDT Michael Garman <michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
> 
> 
> Also, regarding the Otis interview, here's the transcript (https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2024/03/19/could-ranked-choice-voting-take-the-poison-out-of-politics). This is her description of the tabulation process. No lies detected.
> 

My goodness, you're disingenuous.  Or, perhaps, you just don't know what you're talking about.  Should I give you that benefit of doubt?

...
OTIS: Voters in Alaska will not have to do the strategic voting. They just get to ranked honestly. Voters in some other states are going to have to do some tough math.
...

Problem is that in Alaska in August 2022 and in Burlington Vermont in 2009, voters would have to do even tougher math to avoid being burned in those two elections.

Voters for the loser in the final round would have avoided causing the election of their least favorite candidate by voting tactically.  But because they vote sincerely, they got burned.

CHAKRABARTI: What's your best argument for why you think moving to this system is better for American democracy?

OTIS: Oh, there are so many reasons. I think the biggest one is just getting majority winners.
...

That's a lie.  And FV knows it.

CHAKRABARTI: What's your best argument for why you think moving to this system is better for American democracy?

OTIS: Oh, there are so many reasons. I think the biggest one is just getting majority winners.
...

Another lie.

...
(OTIS cont.): And ranked choice has been shown to improve representation for women and people of color.
...

That has also not been shown.  There is no statistical significance that shows that RCV other than trends happening in the 21st century has improved representation of women and POC.

...
OTIS: The ranked choice voting is like an instant runoff. The votes are tabulated in a matter of a couple of seconds. 
...

What's disingenuous here is that, for statewide RCV, it takes ***days*** to centralize the ballot data before the IRV tabulation can begin.  Alaska took 15 days in November 2022.  Maine took 10 days in 2018.

Computers are fast.  Big deal.  But that does not make IRV "Instant".

Without Precinct Summability, we lose a critical part of Process Transparency we need to keep some Trumpist election official from "just find[ing], uh, 11780, uh votes."  Fortunately Raffensberger was not Jeffery Clark.  But if he *was* corrupt, the first thing that prevents a corrupt official from padding the numbers is Precinct Summability and the fact that polling places had already published the necessary data for us to know how the election will turn out.  We have that with FPTP and we lose it with IRV.

...
OTIS:  And ranked choice voting is the best way to take the temperature of the electorate and elect someone who has the broadest support and can best represent the voters.
...

Again a falsehood in both Alaska 2022 and Burlington 2009.  And FV is aware of it.  The candidate with broadest support (by *any* mathematical measure that is not defined by the IRV procedure) in those two elections was the candidate eliminated in the semifinal round.


--

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

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

.
.
.