Instant-runoff voting: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
imported>DanKeshet (add cats, rm many internal links) |
|||
| Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
This dilemma rose to attention in the [[United States]] in the [[U.S. presidential election, 2000|2000 election]]. Supporters of [[Ralph Nader]] who nevertheless preferred [[United States Democratic Party|Democrat]] [[Al Gore]] to [[United States Republican Party|Republican]] [[George W. Bush]] found themselves caught in a dilemma. They could vote for Nader, and risk Gore losing to Bush, or, they could vote for Gore, just to make sure that Bush is defeated. It has been argued that Bush won largely due to the "spoiler effect" of Nader supporters in [[Florida]]. |
This dilemma rose to attention in the [[United States]] in the [[U.S. presidential election, 2000|2000 election]]. Supporters of [[Ralph Nader]] who nevertheless preferred [[United States Democratic Party|Democrat]] [[Al Gore]] to [[United States Republican Party|Republican]] [[George W. Bush]] found themselves caught in a dilemma. They could vote for Nader, and risk Gore losing to Bush, or, they could vote for Gore, just to make sure that Bush is defeated. It has been argued that Bush won largely due to the "spoiler effect" of Nader supporters in [[Florida]]. |
||
In March [[2002]], an initiative backed by the [[Center for Voting and Democracy]] passed by referendum making instant runoff voting the means of electing local candidates in [[San Francisco]]. It was first used in that city in Fall of 2004. (Note: The [http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/site/election_page.asp?id=24269 San Francisco Department of Elections] prefers the term "Ranked Choice Voting" because "the word 'instant' might create an expectation that final results will be available immediately after the polls close on election night.") |
In March [[2002]], an initiative backed by the [[Center for Voting and Democracy]] passed by referendum making instant runoff voting the means of electing local candidates in [[San Francisco]]. It was first used in that city in Fall of 2004. (Note: The [http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/site/election_page.asp?id=24269 San Francisco Department of Elections] prefers the term "Ranked Choice Voting" because "the word 'instant' might create an expectation that final results will be available immediately after the polls close on election night.") Although polls showed voters generally understood and liked the new voting system, certain software and logistical difficulties delayed the election results for several days (the 'first-round' results were available the next day). |
||
In September [[2003]], an amendment to the California State Constitution was proposed ([http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sca_14_bill_20030912_introduced.html SCA 14]) with wide-ranging goals of [[election reform]], including ranked-choice voting for statewide offices. |
In September [[2003]], an amendment to the California State Constitution was proposed ([http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sca_14_bill_20030912_introduced.html SCA 14]) with wide-ranging goals of [[election reform]], including ranked-choice voting for statewide offices. |
||