When they talk about ranked ballots they’re actually talking about the instant run-off ranked voting system that produces the same aggressive politics, defacto 2-party system, lack of climate action. It’s s actually a downgrade over fptp as it makes it harder for the independents/smaller parties to win seats.
It’s s actually a downgrade over fptp as it makes it harder for the independents/smaller parties to win seats.
Is there a mathematical explanation for why this is the case?
I disagree with the notion that IRV is strictly “a downgrade” over FPTP.
Both FPTP and IRV are winner-take-all systems. However, IRV is superior to FPTP, as the spoiler effect is mitigated. We still have wasted votes in any winner-take-all system, but perhaps of varying degrees of severity.
However, proportional representation (e.g., STV or MMP) is the only way to guarantee fair representation for all.
Ranked choice is better than fptp, but not good enough. STAR voting is superior in every way, and actually accomplishes the goals of ranked choice voting.
Anyone opposing alternative voting options on principle doesn’t have your best interest in mind.
The single transferable vote has the ranked voting without the disproportionate results
