Cool Voting System

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:38 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_runoff_voting
I think that this is a pretty awesome voting system. I thought I was the first co come up with it, until I found it on the wiki

Any thoughts?

(If this deserves to be in PTMC Cafe, please put it there)

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:03 am

Yea, right after the 2000 presidential election Mobius pointed this system out.
If we had used it in 1992 Bill Clinton would have never been president because the Ross Perot voters would most probably have ranked George Bush Sr. as their second choice.
And for the other head of the Hydra, Al Gore probably would have beat George W. Bush in 2000 because the Nader voters would have listed Gore as their second choice...

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:13 pm

I personally think its fair. Even if Clinton didn't get elected (I think he is better than Bush Sr.), still seems like a good system. I use it for other things with my friends.

Topher · Post by **Topher** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:12 pm

I think it would be nice, but playing devil's advocate I think it would be a huge amount of work.

For one thing, it may mean counting all ballots twice or more. If there is no clear winner, you have to be extra careful counting (Florida 2000) and even then you have to go back and country wide recount the ballots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IRV_ ... wchart.png

Also, the ballot would have to be designed to be easily read, handwriting in \"1\", \"2\" and \"3\" probably won't fly because some people will just have terrible handwriting. You could make a column for each canditate and punch out \"1\" for your first choice, \"2\" for your second, etc but you've increased the potential mistakes people could make.

I think it would be a great idea if we had a purely electronic voting system, computers are great at crunching numbers over and over, but electronic voting comes with its own criticisms.

Dakatsu · Post by **Dakatsu** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:44 pm

True, well in theory it could work, but I see your point. Voting is bad already, my state already has had 2 recounts in the last 6 years, this would chuck it up to 17.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm

I think people who aren't smart enough to figure the ballot out shouldn't be voting anyway so maybe it could serve two purposes. Can't pass the dry run? You don't vote!