[EM] Better Choices for Democracy

Thu Jun 19 14:39:57 PDT 2025

“Writing a few op-eds” isn’t much better. What’s the plan for building a
grassroots movement?

I’m not impressed by a slick website or a list of names. Appealing to
credentials isn’t a theory of change, Ralph.

On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 5:37 PM Ralph Suter <RLSuter at aol.com> wrote:

> That's a pretty ridiculous put-down given that they're just getting
> started. I can't imagine, judging from the descriptions of the people on
> their staff, board of directors, and advisory board, that they're so stupid
> as to think that "tell your friends" is anything but the beginning of a
> much more sophisticated and well-planned long-term strategy. One way
> they're likely to promote their efforts is with op-ed articles in New York
> Times, Washington Post, and other major publications, as Rob Richie of
> FairVote and other IRV advocates have often done. My guess is that we'll
> begin seeing such articles very soon, maybe in the next week or two.
>
> -Ralph
> On 6/19/2025 4:17 PM, Michael Garman wrote:
>
> It would be neat if they set out an actual theory of change instead of
> just “tell your friends about our cool idea.”
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 5:13 PM Ralph Suter via Election-Methods <
> election-methods at lists.electorama.com> wrote:
>
>> You've oversimplified what they advocate. Their website says:
>> "In almost all large-scale elections, the process of comparing pairs of
>> candidates will identify the Consensus Choice, a single candidate who wins
>> all their head-to-head matchups. In the unlikely event that no Consensus
>> Choice exists, the ultimate winner can be determined by one of the
>> following resolution methods:
>>
>>     "Margin of Loss Resolution: If there is no Consensus Choice, the
>> candidate whose largest head-to-head loss is smallest is declared the
>> winner.
>>
>>     "Number of Wins & Margin of Loss Resolution: The candidate with the
>> most head-to-head wins is declared the winner. In the event that multiple
>> candidates tie for most head-to-head wins, the tie is broken in favor of
>> the one whose largest head-to-head loss is smallest.
>>
>>     "Instant Runoff Resolution: If there is no Consensus Choice, Instant
>> Runoff Voting is used to determine the winner."
>>
>> My biggest question is why they included instant runoff as one of the
>> resolution methods, especially because on their FAQ page, they explain why
>> it isn't a good method:
>>
>> "Instant Runoff Voting
>>
>> "Under Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), voters rank candidates in order of
>> preference. Initially, only first-choice votes are counted. If no candidate
>> has a majority (>50%), the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is
>> eliminated, and votes for that candidate are transferred to the voters’
>> next-ranked candidates. This process repeats until one candidate receives a
>> majority of the remaining votes.
>>
>> "Under Consensus Choice, voters rank candidates similarly, but instead of
>> using sequential elimination rounds, we use rankings to directly compare
>> each candidate against every other candidate in head-to-head matchups. The
>> candidate who wins against every other candidate individually is declared
>> the winner.
>>
>> "Consensus Choice selects the candidate with the broadest support across
>> the entire electorate.
>>
>> "As a result, Consensus Choice discourages divisive campaigning because
>> winners must appeal broadly, not just to a faction or a particular base of
>> supporters.
>>
>> "Example:
>>
>>     "IRV: Candidate A initially leads but doesn't have a majority.
>> Candidate C is eliminated, and votes transfer primarily to Candidate B,
>> making B the winner—even if Candidate D (already eliminated) could have
>> beaten B head-to-head.
>>
>>     "Consensus Choice: Candidate B might have the most pairwise wins
>> against all others directly, immediately making B the winner without
>> needing multiple rounds of eliminations.
>>
>> "Why it matters:
>>
>> "Because it eliminates candidates one at a time, Instant Runoff may
>> eliminate a candidate early who would have broader appeal overall.
>>
>> "Consensus Choice encourages candidates to build broader support among
>> voters to reduce toxic polarization. Under Instant Runoff Voting, the
>> winning candidate only needs to beat the last remaining competitor
>> head-to-head, which doesn't necessarily mean that the IRV winner has
>> majority support when compared to other candidates.
>>
>> "In short, IRV focuses on sequential elimination rounds, while Consensus
>> Choice evaluates comprehensive head-to-head comparisons to select the
>> candidate most broadly supported by the electorate."
>>
>> -Ralph Suter
>> On 6/19/2025 3:02 PM, election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> Send Election-Methods mailing list submissions to
>> 	election-methods at lists.electorama.com
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> 	http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
>>
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> 	election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> 	election-methods-owner at lists.electorama.com
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Election-Methods digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Better Choices for Democracy (Markus Schulze)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 18:17:35 +0200
>> From: Markus Schulze <markus.schulze8 at gmail.com> <markus.schulze8 at gmail.com>
>> To: election-methods at lists.electorama.com
>> Subject: [EM] Better Choices for Democracy
>> Message-ID: <465e498b-a7f2-40e8-9083-3cd518c7729d at gmail.com> <465e498b-a7f2-40e8-9083-3cd518c7729d at gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>>
>> Hallo,
>>
>> in May 2025, "Better Choices for Democracy", a new Condorcet
>> advocacy group, has launched its website:
>> https://www.betterchoices.vote
>>
>> This group consists of people like Nic Tideman, Eric Maskin,
>> Charles T. Munger Jr. and James Green-Armytage.
>>
>> They promote a Condorcet method called "Consensus Choice
>> Voting": If there is a Condorcet winner, that candidate
>> is the winner of Consensus Choice Voting. Otherwise, the
>> winner is determined by IRV. See:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMVLU63Ws9A
>>
>> Interestingly, this Condorcet method doesn't even satisfy
>> independence of clones.
>>
>> Let's say that candidate A is a Condorcet winner, but
>> doesn't receive any first preferences. Consensus Choice
>> Voting then selects candidate A.
>>
>> Now, let's say that candidate A is replaced by clones A1,A2,A3
>> and that none of these clones is a Condorcet winner. Then, IRV
>> kicks in and first eliminates A1, A2 and A3.
>>
>> Markus Schulze
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Election-Methods mailing listElection-Methods at lists.electorama.comhttp://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of Election-Methods Digest, Vol 251, Issue 1
>> ************************************************
>>
>> ----
>> 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/20250619/9033d531/attachment.htm>