Whatever our feelings or experience with FairVote per se, the fact remains that there is no reason to give any credit to an "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: arial, sans-serif; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">informal exit polling of nearly 200 voters" if there is no semblance of methodology or raw results published. Without more data, it's no better than "my taxi driver said".</span><div>
<font class="Apple-style-span" color="#222222" face="arial, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#222222" face="arial, sans-serif">Jameson<br></font><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/11/12 Kathy Dopp <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kathy.dopp@gmail.com">kathy.dopp@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">I would believe nothing whatsoever that comes from the mouth of the<br>
organization FairVote. Usually FairVote spokespersons espouse the<br>
opposite of the truth. For instance, this is the same organization<br>
that continues to falsely claim that IRV solves the spoiler problem of<br>
a nonwinning candidate whose presence in the contest alters who would<br>
otherwise win - not; and falsely claims that IRV finds "majority<br>
winners" by misleadingly redefining the word "majority" to exclude all<br>
the voters whose ballots are exhausted by the final round; and falsely<br>
tells voters that IRV allows them to safely vote their true preference<br>
without worrying about causing their least favorite candidate to win,<br>
etc. and on and on. Virtually nothing coming from the mouth of that<br>
organization is true. Notice their informal poll could have<br>
characterized a 10% confusion rate as "almost uniform ease". Who<br>
knows. I have learned to trust nothing coming from that misnomered<br>
organization.<br>
<br>
> From: David L Wetzell <<a href="mailto:wetzelld@gmail.com">wetzelld@gmail.com</a>><br>
> To: EM <<a href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com">election-methods@lists.electorama.com</a>><br>
> Subject: [EM] Fwd: Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul<br>
> Elections<br>
> Message-ID:<br>
> <<a href="mailto:CAMyHmncQtXiDFcVoc--8UYW0Bqi_GMDCnS5iqBWaw6cqyvqGSQ@mail.gmail.com">CAMyHmncQtXiDFcVoc--8UYW0Bqi_GMDCnS5iqBWaw6cqyvqGSQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"<br>
<div class="im">><br>
> it seems that voters in St Paul liked using IRV for city council elections.<br>
><br>
> dlw<br>
><br>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
> From: FairVote MN <<a href="mailto:info@fairvotemn.org">info@fairvotemn.org</a>><br>
> Date: Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:30 PM<br>
> Subject: Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul Elections<br>
> To: "<a href="mailto:wetzelld@gmail.com">wetzelld@gmail.com</a>" <<a href="mailto:wetzelld@gmail.com">wetzelld@gmail.com</a>><br>
><br>
><br>
</div>> **<br>
> [image: FairVote MN<br>
> eNews]<<a href="http://fairvotemn.org/sites/fairvotemn.org/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=45607&qid=347906" target="_blank">http://fairvotemn.org/sites/fairvotemn.org/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=45607&qid=347906</a>><br>
<div class="im">><br>
> Nov. 9, 2011<br>
><br>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br>
><br>
</div>> *Ranked Choice Voting a Clear Winner in St. Paul Elections*<br>
><br>
> *Voter outreach, clear ballot yield positive experience in wards where RV<br>
> is used*<br>
><br>
> ST. PAUL ? One big winner in St. Paul?s city council elections Tuesday:<br>
<div class="im">> Ranked Choice Voting. Voting reform supporters across Minnesota are elated<br>
</div>> that the new system?s rollout in St. Paul was the clear success we<br>
<div class="im">> anticipated, thanks to a comprehensive voter education campaign conducted<br>
</div>> by FairVote MN and Ramsey County, a well-designed ballot and the system?s<br>
> inherent ease of use.<br>
><br>
> ?The news today is that there is no news,? Joe Mansky, Ramsey County<br>
<div class="im">> election manager, told a Pioneer Press<br>
</div>> reporter<<a href="http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_19292414" target="_blank">http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_19292414</a>>.<br>
<div class="im">> As Ward 3 election judge Robert Mooney said in the same article, the change<br>
</div>> ?hasn?t been controversial or confusing.?<br>
><br>
> In FairVote Minnesota?s informal exit polling of nearly 200 voters in wards<br>
<div class="im">> 1, 2 and 3, voters expressed almost uniform ease of use with the new system<br>
</div>> and most desired to continue using it. ?It?s simple,? ?It?s<br>
> straightforward,? ?I like it ? if my first choice doesn?t make it, I have a<br>
> backup choice,? ?I heard little negativity,? and ?It?s high time this was<br>
> implemented!? were typical comments about the ranked ballot. Early reviews<br>
<div class="im">> of the ballots from the city show few spoiled ballots.<br>
><br>
> In wards with competitive, multicandidate races ? where voters felt their<br>
> backup choices could make the difference ? voters overwhelmingly exercised<br>
</div>> the option to rank candidates. In Ward 2?s close contest between incumbent<br>
<div class="im">> Dave Thune and challengers Jim Ivey and Bill Hosko, a full 72 percent of<br>
> voters cast a second-choice vote. Forty percent cast a third-choice vote,<br>
> 16 percent cast a fourth-choice vote and 10 percent cast a fifth-choice<br>
> vote.<br>
><br>
> In Wards 1 and 2, where results were decisive in the first round of<br>
</div>> counting and second choices didn?t come into play, most voters still used<br>
<div class="im">> their rankings: In Ward 1, 54 percent of voters marked a second choice and<br>
> 27 marked a third choice; in Ward 3, 62 percent marked a second choice and<br>
> 30 percent marked a third choice. This demonstrated that the more<br>
> competitive the race (i.e., the smaller the percentage of votes for the<br>
> winner or the top candidate in round 1), the more voters ranked.<br>
><br>
> In Ward 2, the contest between Thune, Ivey and Hosko will be decided<br>
> Monday, when a manual count will be undertaken at Ramsey County Elections<br>
> Division (90 W. Plato Blvd, St. Paul). The count will begin at 8:30 am and<br>
> is open to the public.<br>
><br>
> Ballots in that race will be counted in rounds, with the lowest<br>
> vote-getters eliminated and their votes redistributed to remaining<br>
> candidates until one has a majority ? or until two candidates remain, and<br>
> the one with the largest number of votes wins. Presently, Dave Thune leads<br>
> in round 1, 12 percentage points ahead of second-place finisher Ivey. Ivey<br>
> leads third-place finisher Hosko by just 57 votes.<br>
><br>
> Ivey garnered the largest share (33 percent) of second-choice votes, with<br>
> Thune and Hosko receiving 25 percent and 23 percent respectively. Ballots<br>
> of the two eliminated candidates, Sharon Anderson and Cynthia Schanno, plus<br>
> write-in ballots, will be redistributed to Thune, Ivey and Hosko based on<br>
</div>> those voters? second choices.<br>
<div class="im">><br>
> Should Hosko advance, the winner will depend on the second choices on<br>
> Ivey's ballots (and potentially the third or additional choices on the<br>
> ballots of the already eliminated candidates). If Ivey advances, the winner<br>
> will depend on the second choices on Hosko's ballots (and potentially the<br>
> third or additional choices on the ballots of the already eliminated<br>
> candidates).<br>
><br>
</div>> Thune?s large initial lead will not be easily surpassed; however, either<br>
> Ivey?s or Hosko?s final totals could potentially exceed Thune?s in the<br>
> final round. Ivey?s large share of second-choice votes is an advantage<br>
<div class="im">> should he advance over Hosko.<br>
><br>
> Voter turnout was roughly equivalent to general election turnout in past<br>
> council elections, there was an increase the number of voters this year in<br>
> Wards 2 and 3, where the races were most competitive. And, more<br>
</div>> importantly, the move to RCV increased voter *participation* overall by<br>
<div class="im">> eliminating the costly, low-turnout primary and rolling two rounds into one<br>
> higher-turnout, more diverse general election. Essentially, more St.<br>
</div>> Paulites had a hand in the ?winnowing? process and the final selection of<br>
<div class="im">> the winner. (In Portland, Maine, which just implemented RCV and had a<br>
> highly competitive citywide mayoral race, turnout exceeded expectations.)<br>
><br>
</div>> FairVote Minnesota congratulates yesterday?s winners and all candidates who<br>
<div class="im">> ran for the first time under RCV. The absence of confusion or difficulty,<br>
> the fact that voters in wards with competitive multicandidate races chose<br>
> to rank their choices, and the widespread positive feedback from voters in<br>
</div>> those wards all attest to the transition?s success ? and the effectiveness<br>
<div class="im">> of the voter education campaign.<br>
><br>
</div>> While many of RCV?s benefits were already shown in Tuesday?s results, some<br>
<div class="im">> will materialize over time. But the triumph of voting reform in St. Paul is<br>
</div>> cause for celebration, and we?re confident that more cities across<br>
<div class="im">> Minnesota will embrace RCV ? a political innovation that fosters<br>
> competition, increases voter participation, encourages positive campaigning<br>
</div>> and eliminates worries about ?spoilers? and ?wasted votes? in municipal<br>
> elections.<br>
><br>
> -n-<br>
<div class="im">><br>
><br>
><br>
> Click here to opt out of all e-mail<br>
</div>> announcements<<a href="http://fairvotemn.org/index.php?q=civicrm/mailing/optout&reset=1&jid=636&qid=347906&h=4e14e2035b34612a" target="_blank">http://fairvotemn.org/index.php?q=civicrm/mailing/optout&reset=1&jid=636&qid=347906&h=4e14e2035b34612a</a>><br>
> FairVote MN Privacy<br>
> Policy<<a href="http://fairvotemn.org/sites/fairvotemn.org/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=45609&qid=347906" target="_blank">http://fairvotemn.org/sites/fairvotemn.org/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=45609&qid=347906</a>><br>
<div class="im">> PO Box 19440<br>
> Minneapolis, MN 55419-0440<br>
> United States<br>
> <a href="mailto:info@fairvotemn.org">info@fairvotemn.org</a><br>
> (763) 807-2550<br>
</div>> -------------- next part --------------<br>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
> URL: <<a href="http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111111/4631699e/attachment-0001.htm" target="_blank">http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111111/4631699e/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
><br>
<br>
Kathy Dopp<br>
<a href="http://electionmathematics.org" target="_blank">http://electionmathematics.org</a><br>
Town of Colonie, NY 12304<br>
"One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the<br>
discussion with true facts."<br>
"Renewable energy is homeland security."<br>
<br>
Fundamentals of Verifiable Elections<br>
<a href="http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174" target="_blank">http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174</a><br>
<br>
View some of my research on my SSRN Author page:<br>
<a href="http://ssrn.com/author=1451051" target="_blank">http://ssrn.com/author=1451051</a><br>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>