<html><head>
</head>
<body style="margin-bottom:45px">
<div style="font-size: 10pt;"><div dir="auto">You mean BTR-IRV?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">How about straight-ahead Condorcet with Top-Two Runoff in the case of a cycle? It's sorta like IRV in the contingency of a cycle.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I am beginning to realize that to get legislation passed, we need the language of the proposed law to simply "say what it means and mean what it says.". To me, that means a "Two-method system ", that is straight-ahead Condorcet along with a completion method that, to the pedestrian voter or policy maker, makes simple sense. Top-two delayed runoff is what we do now in jurisdictions that use FPTP ballots but require a 50% (or sometimes lower, like 40%) vote for the winner.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">r b-j</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Burlington Vermont </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><div dir="auto" font-size:9pt;"=""><i>Powered by Cricket
Wireless</i></div></div></div><div style="font-size: 10pt;"><div id="LGEmailHeader" dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">------ Original message------</div><div dir="auto"><b>From: </b>Richard via Election-Methods<election-methods@lists.electorama.com></election-methods@lists.electorama.com></div><div dir="auto"><b>Date: </b>Thu, Aug 21, 2025 17:18</div><div dir="auto"><b>To: </b><a href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com">election-methods@lists.electorama.com</a>;</div><div dir="auto"><b>Cc: </b></div><div dir="auto"><b>Subject:</b>[EM] Compromise between IRV and Condorcet methods</div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><pre>On 8/21/25 11:37, Chris Benham via Election-Methods wrote:
> *Elect whichever of the Hare winner and the most approved candidate
> pairwise beats the other.*
Here I'll put in a plug for refining IRV by eliminating pairwise losing
candidates when they occur. It's a simple compromise between IRV and
Condorcet methods that isn't "clunky" and yields lots of "bang for the
buck."
A pairwise losing candidate is a candidate who loses every one-on-one
contest against every other remaining candidate.
Only when a counting round lacks a pairwise losing candidate does the
combined method fall back on eliminating the candidate with the fewest
transferred votes.
Richard Fobes
</pre><pre>----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="https://electorama.com/em">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre></div>
</body></html>