Vote splitting: Difference between revisions

A standard example of Vote splitting is when two candidates are similar so they each get half the votes they would if the other were not running. This is a good example of failing the [[Independence of clone alternatives]] criteria. Another issue is that the voter’s preferred candidate may be highly unpopular in the constituency. This means that using their only vote on that candidate has no influence on the result and could be better served on a second or third choice. This is a problem of voter impact which can be thought of how clearly a voter’s true choice is translated into the election of a candidate. This is often referred to as the ''wasted vote problem'' if they still vote for their favorite or the [[Favorite betrayal criterion | favorite betrayal]] problem if they vote for another candidate. This system rewards voters for not voting for whom they really want and as such promotes strategic voting. Furthermore, it implies that the voter’s choice will be heavily dependant on their estimates of how others will vote, not on their preference. The use of fake polls or deceptive reporting can have large effects on election outcomes where strategic voting is emphasized. With all systems of voting, the second order effect from people trying to vote strategically must be considered.

The major advantage of such a system is to eliminate the standard forms of vote splitting which are present in [[Single-mark ballot]] systems. This effectively eliminates issues which give rise to the [[wasted vote]] or the [[Favorite betrayal criterion | favorite betrayal]] problems.