tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746899831573691835.post1077884397949598264..comments2024-01-15T11:52:07.862-05:00Comments on The Independent View: Ranked-Choice Voting in NYCmhdruckerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05923626064364175846noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746899831573691835.post-80986230322495821822017-03-19T23:10:49.578-04:002017-03-19T23:10:49.578-04:00This is actually a pretty bad idea. IRV is a flaw...This is actually a pretty bad idea. IRV is a flawed, obsolete voting system that harms independents, perpetuates two-party rule, and behaves bizarrely in competitive elections.<br /><br />Under IRV, increasing your support for a candidate can cause them to lose, and decreasing support for a candidate can cause them to win. IRV is unfairly biased against moderates, eliminating them and electing partisans instead, even when the moderate has the highest approval rating.<br /><br />FairVote's letter claims that IRV "allows voters to honestly vote for their favorite candidate without fear that it will help elect their least favorite", but this is absolutely false. Under IRV, voting honestly can cause your second-favorite to be eliminated and your least-favorite candidate to win, while voting dishonestly would have caused your second-favorite to win ("favorite betrayal"). It doesn't eliminate the spoiler effect.<br /><br />Burlington, VT adopted IRV, and it failed soon after, selecting a winner who was neither the most-approved nor the most-preferred. How much money was wasted on that foolish experiment?<br /><br />There are many other voting systems, all of which are better than IRV. The best choices are probably Score voting or Score-Runoff voting (a modification of Score that discourages strategic voting). These eliminate the spoiler effect, the vote splitting effect, are precinct-summable, and perform much better than IRV. Please do due diligence researching voting systems and don't just believe everything FairVote says.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com