Editing 1844: Voting Systems

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
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.
 
# '''{{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.
 
# 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.
βˆ’
# 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.
+
# 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.
  
 
'''{{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.
 
'''{{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.

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)