Instant Runoff Voting

A case for and the mechanics of IRV, brought to you by FairVote.org.

• Category

  News & Politics

[BI30]

Here in Texas, Gov. Rick Perry won re-election in 2006 with just 39% of the vote, thanks to two third Party candidates (Kinky Freedman and Carol Keeton Strayhorn) splitting the anti-Perry vote with Democrat Chris Bell (second with 30%). I don't know about you, but when 61% of the electorate votes against you, you have no business winning the election.

[nilent]

This is a no brainer! It should be popular on a non-partisan basis. It's "just" a matter of communicating/explaining the concept.

I wonder why the Democrats and Republicans are mum on this?

[gjsterp]

Need to have a 'second choice' on a ballot that has more then two candidates..

[Gwenyth Wynne]

This doesn't include the power IRV has to break the duopoly control over politics that a 2-party system maintains. Therefor limiting the monopolistic control they maintain over politics in a nation.

[kenneth mabie]

well add preference order to what you said and then you have instant runoff voting, also we need to get rid of the electoral college, thats who really "votes" in people, getting rid of that ( what you said first) then having the peoples vote counted and a preference vote ( who like most middle and least) and you have IRV get it now?

[Yah Saves]

i dont get it? and I'm sure many others do not either......cant support something ya dont get... but I have to ask, WHY aren't votes counted as they come in? if a citizen votes for anyone that vote should go to THAT candidate no matter what? this to me would BE ACCURATE VOTING? and from what I've read, seen, learned, etc it is ALL rigged now a days with the electronic crap. FDR said once...." Politicians are SELECTED NOT ELECTED" this is APPARENT w/ all the tyranny the FEDS carry out as of late.

[CB CBlargh]

I'd prefer open primaries + a general election with top 2 vote-getters, but IRV is a much better method than what most of the USA currently has.

Anything's better than Ralph Nader selecting a winner. That's a craze-ocracy, not a democracy.

California had open primaries until a few years ago when our fuckbag supreme court declared it unconstitutional... Political parties have rights and individuals do not according to them... The supreme court of California is a giant fucking failure.

[Steve Spears]

Borda Count!!

[Sean Walker]

It's a shame that IRV doesn't actually fix the spoiler problem. All ranked choice methods fail the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives criterion and the Favorite Betrayal criterion, the two causes of the spoiler effect. Rating methods like range (best) and approval (simplest) pass these criterion. I recommend that all supporters of IRV go look at the Center for Range Voting website and see the math for yourselves. IRV has many flaws, and there are far better options that can be implemented.

[ChickenBot]

choice is an illusion created between those with power and those without

[Ted Stern]

Single Transferable Vote is a well-tested way to get PR. And PR is a good way to choose a parliament or legislature, since it brings many independent voices to the discussion.

But single winner elections such as president, governor or senator should choose the strongest centrist, rather than the strongest member of the strongest faction, in order to reach consensus.

Score voting is far better than IRV and is far simpler to implement.

[norehct]

"Wherever IRV can combine two rounds of balloting into one and eliminate unnecessary elections, it can save cash-strapped municipalities some serious money. Elections don't come cheap. One shudders to think of the millions and millions of dollars that Virginia's taxpayers just shelled out to draw a scant 6 percent of registered voters to the polls." Blair