Anonymous user
User:Araucaria: Difference between revisions
→A better single-winner [[Voting system]]: discuss STV vs. IRV
imported>Araucaria No edit summary |
imported>Araucaria (→A better single-winner [[Voting system]]: discuss STV vs. IRV) |
||
Line 41:
Local representation is best implemented using [[Proportional_representation|Proportional]] or [http://www.fairvote.org/pr/ Full Representation], with at least 5 members per district. The best way to do this is with [[Single_transferable_vote]] (STV).
=== A better single-winner [[Voting system]] ===
Proportional Representation (PR) proponents tend to think that if STV is good for multi-winner elections, it will be good for single-winner elections also, in the form known as [[Instant-runoff_voting|Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)]]. But [[Instant-runoff_voting#Flaws_of_IRV|it isn't]]. That's because STV is very good at ensuring representation of a wide variety of different viewpoints but isn't so good at aggregating many different viewpoints into a single compromise.
The best [[voting system]] for single-winner elections (e.g. senator, governor, president) is [[Condorcet_method|Condorcet]], also known as Instant Round Robin or Pairwise Voting. It uses a ranked ballot, just like IRV, but is counted differently.
* Unlike IRV, it doesn't require recounting ballots after each elimination.
* Unlike IRV, all ranked preferences are accounted for, not just those for the eliminated candidates.
=== See also ===
* [http://accuratedemocracy.com/voting_rules.htm AccurateDemocracy.com]
| |||