The Washington Post has this editorial, suggesting that the District of Columbia choose its officials using Ranked-Choice voting. Thanks to Rob Richie for the link.
The Washington Post has this editorial, suggesting that the District of Columbia choose its officials using Ranked-Choice voting. Thanks to Rob Richie for the link.
There are PROBLEMS with ALL election methods with 3 or more choices.
Due to —
IF choice C shows up, then
C may beat both A and B — C > (A>B)
C may lose to both A and B — (A>B) > C
BUT C may beat A BUT lose to B (aka circular tie) — C>A>B>C [requiring a tiebreaker in advance]
There is BOTH a YES/NO and a number ranking (1,2,etc.) part in voting on multiple choices.
Thus there should be both voting YES/NO and number ranking the choices.
In any large election there would have to be computer vote counting.
In the meantime pending REAL Democracy and utopia —
P.R. for legislative bodies.
App.V. for executive/judicial offices.
— before it is too late and the gerrymander MONSTERS in Deficit City start Civil WAR II with their gerrymander laws and/or EVIL powermad mouths.
Fairvote does support proportional representation.
Proportional representation through multimember districts is preferred, but in its absence, instant runoff voting in a single member district is better than plurality voting, hands down.