1844: Voting Systems - Revision history

2403:5810:2E2F:0:1DA8:62C7:D97C:3407: /* Explanation */ Australia uses IRV since 1918, to the point that the culture has shifted around the voting system.

2026-02-20T13:51:21Z

‎Explanation: Australia uses IRV since 1918, to the point that the culture has shifted around the voting system.

2403:5810:2E2F:0:1DA8:62C7:D97C:3407: /* Explanation */

2026-02-20T13:48:05Z

‎Explanation

2403:5810:2E2F:0:1DA8:62C7:D97C:3407: /* Explanation */ Every single state and territory in Australia, uses IRV.

2026-02-20T13:45:22Z

‎Explanation: Every single state and territory in Australia, uses IRV.

2A00:807:C1:CF67:9855:1DEB:E619:8E29: Moved the references section above the discussion

2025-07-28T06:31:03Z

Moved the references section above the discussion

172.71.26.130: /* Explanation / cn after way too many* citations is at least a little funny

2022-12-15T21:56:06Z

‎Explanation: cn after *way too many* citations is at least a little funny

JLZ0kTC5 at 04:01, 4 November 2022

2022-11-04T04:01:13Z

172.70.85.211: Voting is a gamble, but gambling is a worse one...

2022-06-22T08:05:38Z

Voting is a gamble, but gambling is a worse one...

172.68.238.41 at 06:48, 22 June 2022

2022-06-22T06:48:30Z

172.68.238.109 at 06:46, 22 June 2022

2022-06-22T06:46:44Z

172.68.238.23 at 06:43, 22 June 2022

2022-06-22T06:43:18Z

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 # '''{{w|Approval voting}}''' has voters "approve" (i.e. select) any number of candidates. The winner is the most-approved candidate. It works with the same unranked ballot as plurality voting, but would allow a "compromise" candidate who is the second choice of a majority to defeat a candidate who is supported by a plurality but disliked by other groups.
-# '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated. The main users of IRV are the Australians, who use this system for all levels of elections. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco.
+# '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated.  IRV is primarily used by the Australians, for all levels of elections. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco.
 # A '''{{w|Condorcet method}}''' elects the candidate that would win a majority of the vote in all of the head-to-head elections against each of the other candidates. A candidate with this property is called the Condorcet winner. Due to the {{w|Condorcet paradox}}, an election with 3 or more candidates might not have a Condorcet winner, so Condorcet methods differ in the secondary set of rules used to handle that situation.
 # Not directly mentioned in the comic, '''{{w|First-past-the-post voting}}''' (FPTP, aka '''{{w|Plurality (voting)|plurality voting}}''') is the method currently used in the US, UK, and several other countries. It only allows voters to choose a single candidate. Experts on voting methods agree there are multiple reasons why FPTP is not the best way to implement democracy,<ref>https://www.ippr.org/files/images/media/files/publication/2011/05/Worst%20of%20Both%20Worlds%20Jan2011_1820.pdf</ref><ref>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting-methods/#ExamVotiMeth</ref><ref>https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/spoiler-effect-top-5-ways-plurality-voting-fails/</ref><ref>https://www.fairvote.org/plurality_voting_leaves_elections_open_to_manipulation</ref><ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254419149_And_the_loser_is_Plurality_Voting</ref><ref>https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/first-past-the-post</ref><ref>https://blog.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/no-electoral-system-is-perfect-but-some-seem-fairer/</ref>{{cn}} but they made little progress in replacing it in the United States for decades. However, this is changing; the state of Maine and numerous cities have adopted either IRV or Approval in recent years.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 # '''{{w|Approval voting}}''' has voters "approve" (i.e. select) any number of candidates. The winner is the most-approved candidate. It works with the same unranked ballot as plurality voting, but would allow a "compromise" candidate who is the second choice of a majority to defeat a candidate who is supported by a plurality but disliked by other groups.
-# '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco, and all elections in Australia.
+# '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated. The main users of IRV are the Australians, who use this system for all levels of elections. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco.
 # A '''{{w|Condorcet method}}''' elects the candidate that would win a majority of the vote in all of the head-to-head elections against each of the other candidates. A candidate with this property is called the Condorcet winner. Due to the {{w|Condorcet paradox}}, an election with 3 or more candidates might not have a Condorcet winner, so Condorcet methods differ in the secondary set of rules used to handle that situation.
 # Not directly mentioned in the comic, '''{{w|First-past-the-post voting}}''' (FPTP, aka '''{{w|Plurality (voting)|plurality voting}}''') is the method currently used in the US, UK, and several other countries. It only allows voters to choose a single candidate. Experts on voting methods agree there are multiple reasons why FPTP is not the best way to implement democracy,<ref>https://www.ippr.org/files/images/media/files/publication/2011/05/Worst%20of%20Both%20Worlds%20Jan2011_1820.pdf</ref><ref>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting-methods/#ExamVotiMeth</ref><ref>https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/spoiler-effect-top-5-ways-plurality-voting-fails/</ref><ref>https://www.fairvote.org/plurality_voting_leaves_elections_open_to_manipulation</ref><ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254419149_And_the_loser_is_Plurality_Voting</ref><ref>https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/first-past-the-post</ref><ref>https://blog.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/no-electoral-system-is-perfect-but-some-seem-fairer/</ref>{{cn}} but they made little progress in replacing it in the United States for decades. However, this is changing; the state of Maine and numerous cities have adopted either IRV or Approval in recent years.

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 # '''{{w|Approval voting}}''' has voters "approve" (i.e. select) any number of candidates. The winner is the most-approved candidate. It works with the same unranked ballot as plurality voting, but would allow a "compromise" candidate who is the second choice of a majority to defeat a candidate who is supported by a plurality but disliked by other groups.
-# '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco, and Federal elections in Australia.
+# '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco, and all elections in Australia.
 # A '''{{w|Condorcet method}}''' elects the candidate that would win a majority of the vote in all of the head-to-head elections against each of the other candidates. A candidate with this property is called the Condorcet winner. Due to the {{w|Condorcet paradox}}, an election with 3 or more candidates might not have a Condorcet winner, so Condorcet methods differ in the secondary set of rules used to handle that situation.
 # Not directly mentioned in the comic, '''{{w|First-past-the-post voting}}''' (FPTP, aka '''{{w|Plurality (voting)|plurality voting}}''') is the method currently used in the US, UK, and several other countries. It only allows voters to choose a single candidate. Experts on voting methods agree there are multiple reasons why FPTP is not the best way to implement democracy,<ref>https://www.ippr.org/files/images/media/files/publication/2011/05/Worst%20of%20Both%20Worlds%20Jan2011_1820.pdf</ref><ref>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting-methods/#ExamVotiMeth</ref><ref>https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/spoiler-effect-top-5-ways-plurality-voting-fails/</ref><ref>https://www.fairvote.org/plurality_voting_leaves_elections_open_to_manipulation</ref><ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254419149_And_the_loser_is_Plurality_Voting</ref><ref>https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/first-past-the-post</ref><ref>https://blog.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/no-electoral-system-is-perfect-but-some-seem-fairer/</ref>{{cn}} but they made little progress in replacing it in the United States for decades. However, this is changing; the state of Maine and numerous cities have adopted either IRV or Approval in recent years.

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 :[Caption beneath the panel:]
 :Strong Arrow's theorem: The people who find Arrow's theorem significant will never agree on anything anyway.
 {{comic discussion}}
 [[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 # '''{{w|Instant-runoff voting}}''' (also known as Ranked Choice or Preferential Voting) has voters rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each elector's top choice. If a candidate secures more than half of these votes, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate in last place is eliminated and removed from consideration. Ballots that had this candidate as the top choice now have the second preference as the top choice (this is the "instant runoff"). The top remaining choices on all the ballots are then counted again. This process repeats until one candidate is the top remaining choice of a majority of the voters or all but one candidate have been eliminated. IRV's proponents have successfully implemented it in a few places, such as the city of San Francisco, and Federal elections in Australia.
 # A '''{{w|Condorcet method}}''' elects the candidate that would win a majority of the vote in all of the head-to-head elections against each of the other candidates. A candidate with this property is called the Condorcet winner. Due to the {{w|Condorcet paradox}}, an election with 3 or more candidates might not have a Condorcet winner, so Condorcet methods differ in the secondary set of rules used to handle that situation.
-# Not directly mentioned in the comic, '''{{w|First-past-the-post voting}}''' (FPTP, aka '''{{w|Plurality (voting)|plurality voting}}''') is the method currently used in the US, UK, and several other countries. It only allows voters to choose a single candidate. Experts on voting methods agree there are multiple reasons why FPTP is not the best way to implement democracy,<ref>https://www.ippr.org/files/images/media/files/publication/2011/05/Worst%20of%20Both%20Worlds%20Jan2011_1820.pdf</ref><ref>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting-methods/#ExamVotiMeth</ref><ref>https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/spoiler-effect-top-5-ways-plurality-voting-fails/</ref><ref>https://www.fairvote.org/plurality_voting_leaves_elections_open_to_manipulation</ref><ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254419149_And_the_loser_is_Plurality_Voting</ref><ref>https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/first-past-the-post</ref><ref>https://blog.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/no-electoral-system-is-perfect-but-some-seem-fairer/</ref> but they made little progress in replacing it in the United States for decades. However, this is changing; the state of Maine and numerous cities have adopted either IRV or Approval in recent years.
+# Not directly mentioned in the comic, '''{{w|First-past-the-post voting}}''' (FPTP, aka '''{{w|Plurality (voting)|plurality voting}}''') is the method currently used in the US, UK, and several other countries. It only allows voters to choose a single candidate. Experts on voting methods agree there are multiple reasons why FPTP is not the best way to implement democracy,<ref>https://www.ippr.org/files/images/media/files/publication/2011/05/Worst%20of%20Both%20Worlds%20Jan2011_1820.pdf</ref><ref>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/voting-methods/#ExamVotiMeth</ref><ref>https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/spoiler-effect-top-5-ways-plurality-voting-fails/</ref><ref>https://www.fairvote.org/plurality_voting_leaves_elections_open_to_manipulation</ref><ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254419149_And_the_loser_is_Plurality_Voting</ref><ref>https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/first-past-the-post</ref><ref>https://blog.realinstitutoelcano.org/en/no-electoral-system-is-perfect-but-some-seem-fairer/</ref>{{cn}} but they made little progress in replacing it in the United States for decades. However, this is changing; the state of Maine and numerous cities have adopted either IRV or Approval in recent years.
 '''{{w|Arrow's impossibility theorem}}''' gives a list of criteria for ranked voting systems and states that [http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q60ZXoXP6Hg no system] can satisfy all of them at once, despite that for each of them it may seem "obvious" that an electoral system ought to satisfy it. Some voting theorists (such as Cueball) dislike IRV because it {{w|Comparison of electoral systems#Compliance of selected single-winner methods (table)|fails more of the criteria}} than Condorcet does.

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 A third joke is the recursive self-referencing inherent in voting to choose a voting system.
-The title text stipulates that Cueball has no fixed ranking of preference for human candidates, but makes this choice dependent on which voting system is favoured by the group. This exceeds strategic voting considerations as the ranking should have full information, whom Cueball prefers in each situation. Therefore Arrow's impossibility theorem and the analysis behind it assume the ranked preferences of an individual voter as a fixed given. To make them dependent on the voting system makes assessing the efficacy of the voting systems absurd or at least much more complicated to do as a general assessment. That is given as the reason why Arrow would wholeheartedly hate him.
+The title text stipulates that Cueball has no fixed ranking of preference for human candidates, but makes this choice dependent on which voting system is favored by the group. This exceeds strategic voting considerations as the ranking should have full information, whom Cueball prefers in each situation. Therefore Arrow's impossibility theorem and the analysis behind it assume the ranked preferences of an individual voter as a fixed given. To make them dependent on the voting system makes assessing the efficacy of the voting systems absurd or at least much more complicated to do as a general assessment. That is given as the reason why Arrow would wholeheartedly hate him.
 ==Transcript==

@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 [[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
 [[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
 [[Category:Politics]]
 [[Category:Elections]]