Ranked Robin: Difference between revisions
Added section “Legal and economic viability”
(Added section “Legal and economic viability”) |
|||
Line 267:
</blockquote>In the rare case of a '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' tie, if there are many candidates, it is recommended to focus on who the tied finalists are and their Total Advantages over all other candidates (which will not sum to 0).
== Legal and economic viability ==
When legally defined as ''always'' reducing to a finalist set first and then electing the finalist with the greatest difference among finalists (as described in the '''1<sup>st</sup> Degree''' tiebreaker), Ranked Robin always elects a majority preferred winner, arguably including in cases of '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' ties. This legal definition does not change the outcomes of Ranked Robin. Many municipalities in the [[United States]] are subject to majority clauses in their state election codes, often requiring those jurisdictions to run two or more elections for a certain races. Ranked Robin can satisfy many of those majority clauses in a single election, allowing municipalities to eliminate an election if so desired, helping to offset the costs of implementing Ranked Robin, typically entirely within one election cycle.
If there is only 1 finalist, then they are voted for by a majority of voters who had a preference among finalists.
If there are multiple finalists, at least 1 finalist will have a positive difference (Total Advantage) and at least 1 finalist will have a negative difference because the sum of differences will always equal 0. Because the finalist with the greatest difference is elected, that winner is guaranteed to have a positive difference, demonstrating that among finalists, they are a majority preferred winner.
If there is a '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' tie, all of the finalists could have a negative difference when compared to all candidates, but it could be argued that because the ''finalist'' with the greatest difference is elected, the winner was voted for by a majority of voters who had a preference ''among finalists''. This argument is further strengthened in the case that exactly 2 finalists experience a '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' tie, which covers almost all cases of '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' ties. If this argument is found not to satisfy a particular majority clause, it may be desirable to leave the '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' tiebreaker out of the legislation and legally declare a tie in the equivalent case of a '''2<sup>nd</sup> Degree''' tie, which is about as rare as a tie under [[First Past the Post electoral system|Choose-one Voting]].
== Criteria ==
| |||