4 ms·

Interesting video on voting systems https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE

ramanan 11y ago
CGP Grey! I came here to post the same link. His entire series is very informative. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7679C7ACE93A5638 https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7679C7ACE93A5638
iopq 11y ago
Also leads to a two party effect because of the elimination property. You should still strategically vote for Gorilla as #1 because otherwise you could have Owl first eliminate Gorilla and then lose to Tiger, for example. So if you prefer Owl > Gorilla, you still have to go with Gorilla as #1 because Owl might not have enough to beat Tiger. This means it still leads to Tiger vs. Gorilla two party system. It's already implemented in Australia and they still have a two party government.
- higherpurpose 11y ago
  AV/IRV is indeed not much better than FPTP. Approval/preferential voting is, though. Here's an example here: http://www.electology.org/#!approval-voting-versus-irv/c1mmu http://www.electology.org/#!approval-voting-versus-irv/c1mmu With IRV Obama would've crushed all of his competitors when he got elected for the 2nd term. IRV seems to favor incumbents greatly, which is probably why things haven't changed so much in Australia either - so not much better than FPTP in the US. People still very much vote strategically with IRV. With approval voting on the other hand, Stein (Green Party candidate) would've had a huge chance in the election. Maybe she would've still lost, like the chart predicts, but we would've had much better kind of debates than Obama vs Romney. Romney would've been crushed because he was so disliked. In fact many other "fringe" candidates that were liked in that election would've done much better under approval voting than under FPTP or IRV.
  - iopq 11y ago
    I've examined the issue and that's why I like range/approval voting better. Johnson did better in that simulation too.

ramanan 11y ago

CGP Grey! I came here to post the same link. His entire series is very informative. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7679C7ACE93A5638 https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7679C7ACE93A5638

iopq 11y ago

Also leads to a two party effect because of the elimination property. You should still strategically vote for Gorilla as #1 because otherwise you could have Owl first eliminate Gorilla and then lose to Tiger, for example. So if you prefer Owl > Gorilla, you still have to go with Gorilla as #1 because Owl might not have enough to beat Tiger. This means it still leads to Tiger vs. Gorilla two party system. It's already implemented in Australia and they still have a two party government.

higherpurpose 11y ago
AV/IRV is indeed not much better than FPTP. Approval/preferential voting is, though. Here's an example here: http://www.electology.org/#!approval-voting-versus-irv/c1mmu http://www.electology.org/#!approval-voting-versus-irv/c1mmu With IRV Obama would've crushed all of his competitors when he got elected for the 2nd term. IRV seems to favor incumbents greatly, which is probably why things haven't changed so much in Australia either - so not much better than FPTP in the US. People still very much vote strategically with IRV. With approval voting on the other hand, Stein (Green Party candidate) would've had a huge chance in the election. Maybe she would've still lost, like the chart predicts, but we would've had much better kind of debates than Obama vs Romney. Romney would've been crushed because he was so disliked. In fact many other "fringe" candidates that were liked in that election would've done much better under approval voting than under FPTP or IRV.
- iopq 11y ago
  I've examined the issue and that's why I like range/approval voting better. Johnson did better in that simulation too.