4 ms·
It's arguably still a better situation than FPTP. In other countries, like Australia, where they're used to alternative styles of voting, they have guides on h
by t-writescode 4y ago
It's arguably still a better situation than FPTP.
In other countries, like Australia, where they're used to alternative styles of voting, they have guides on how to vote and who to put in what rank to match what a given party thinks is the best rundown of potentials.
Alaska will get there.
- gamegoblin 4y agoI would put higher odds on Alaska repealing and going back to FPTP. That's what happened in a few US cities that have experienced controversial Condorcet failures with RCV, e.g. Burlington Vermont. The right-wing media machine is drumming up support for a repeal right now.
- t-writescode 4y agoI find your word choice here, “failure” interesting, as it worked as implemented, the local politicians just aren’t used to the new game they have to play.
- gamegoblin 4y agoI'm not saying RCV failed, I agree it worked as intended. "Condorcet failure" is a phrase meaning a failure of the voting system to select the Condorcet winner. If a candidate beats all other candidates in a 1-on-1 election, they are what is referred to as the Condorcet winner [1]. If a Condorcet winner exists, and an election system fails to select that candidate, that is a Condorcet failure. Whether or not you think Condorcet failures are important or not is a matter of opinion. But they are important to many people (at least on an intuitive level). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_winner_criterion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_winner_criterion