The St. Louis initiative to use Approval Voting for the city’s elections for its own officers has enough valid signatures. In November 2020 the voters of St. Louis will vote on whether to use Approval Voting. Approval Voting lets a voter vote for as many candidates as desired, even if only one office is being filled. All votes cast count equally and which candidate has the most votes wins.
PARTISAN PR — legis
NONPARTISAN AV — exec/judic offices
TOTSOP
I prefer Instant Runoff Voting.
PR and AV – pending Condorcet — IRV done correctly.
Andy,
Approval voting is simpler and better than IRV in essentially every way.
https://www.electionscience.org/library/approval-voting-versus-irv/
Not true, irv is better.
Frank,
I cited a link showing how approval voting is better than IRV on every metric.
https://www.electionscience.org/library/approval-voting-versus-irv/
I’ve seen it in real life and it sucks.
Posting your link again doesn’t change that. I’d stick with irv all the way.
Falloffs with all methods beyond one vote.
See SF city/county regime.
Approval voting is pretty much a one-party or two-party system, and depending on how it’s used is can be semi-proportional representation.
No way. No can do. Only pure proportional representation (PPR) Electoral College.
ANNOUNCEMENT
By James Ogle [One]
4/2/2020
New Titles for Executives Under New One-chair System
http://www.usparliament.org
Chair: Svetlana Natalia Boginskaya [Libertarian]
Vice Chair: James Ogle [One]
Deputy Vice Chair: Sorinne F. Ardeleanu [Libertarian]
Secretary: Jonathan Jaech [Libertarian]
Vice Secretary: Benjamin Meiklejohn [Independent Green]
* * *
James,
> I’ve seen it in real life and it sucks.
Give me an example. We’ve studied numerous real world examples and it worked great. E.g. Dartmouth College.
I prefer total write-in voting. Simple. Easy. User friendly. No state authorized ballots. No petition requirements.
The AppV voting system comes in many variations depending of how many votes are cast and how many seat are empty.
For example under the US Constitution two votes per Elector for two seats makes it where the biggest faction votes as a slate and wins both seats.
Under limited voting for two seats, voters get one vote, and that is semi-proportional because there can still be a split-vote problem brought by using Xs.
Only by using ranked choice voting in multiple-winner election districts, consecutively ranked names, one whole vote per paper ballot, one-man-one-vote, the single transferable vote (STV) … only under the very strict math, transparency and paper ballots as proof, can we prove and agree on the results under pure proportional representation.
The United Coalition USA has been using pure proportional representation (PPR) correctly for more than twenty-five consecutive years and PPR works fine.
http://www.usparliament.org
Example libertarian national conventions since 2014.
The “election science” site is anything but scientific. It uses one sided arguments and bias loaded examples to “prove” a fallacy. Approval voting is no easier to use than ranked choice, but it is easy to game by bullet voting. It gives less voice to the voter about their relative preferences among candidates. It devolves into a plurality system with a diluted vote for the few naive enough to rank multiple candidates. It provides the illusion of being able to support a challenger, while insuring that the incumbent/establishment candidate will win.
I dislike the Approval Voting that has happened at LP Conventions. It further entrenches people who get voted in over and over based on name recognition.
Agreed with Charles. I used to be a fan of approval voting until I saw what a mess it made of lp internal elections. Now not so much.