My simplest 2016 anti-IRV pro-score summary

You are here

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
My simplest 2016 anti-IRV pro-score summary

Please feel free to reuse this text, I hereby make it CC0 public domain:


Rank choice FAILS to eliminate the spoiler effect, it just moves it. Consider that IRV claims it to be okay for Bernie to run as Green (as he was offered by Jill Stein) without spoiler. Well, let's say 45% top choice Trump, 35% top choice Bernie, 20% top choice Hillary. Hillary gets eliminated, because her voters are centrists, her 20% is split 6% 2nd choice Trump, 14% 2nd choice Bernie. Boom, Trump wins even if all the Bernie voters had Hillary as their 2nd choice. The claim that it was safe for all the Bernie voters to vote for Bernie because they would get their votes moved to their 2nd choice otherwise is a LIE. You only get your votes moved to your 2nd choice in IRV if you do not come in 2nd place overall. If your candidate comes in 2nd, your votes are worthless. Your votes can actually be WORSE than if you never voted at all in some cases…

As soon as people get this experience, they learn it's not safe to vote their real feelings, and 2-party domination is entrenched forever and we squander our chance at voting reform.

This ACTUALLY happened already in Bernie's own Burlington VT:

IRV is a failed system and so is any other type of forced-ranking.

Approval voting or the better full approach of Score (aka Range) voting has NONE of these problems, is basically optimal, and there's NO good reason to not have everyone get behind these good directions that *actually* eliminate spoiler effect. has all the details


(unrelated side note: this forum needs to remove most of the categories. It hurts the forum to have tons of inactive categories. Start with just a 3-5 categories at most and then add if things grow out of hand, the large number of categories is harmful to active discourse)

Needs a video

I really am thinking about making a video around this although my time is limited, it would take away from other timely and important projects. But we HAVE to respond to the moment here or we'll have everyone tragically pushing IRV!

Reviving an old thread

Reviving an old thread perhaps...

What are folks thoughts about FairVote's position? They claim that range/score/approval voting fails to meet the "later no harm" criterion and therefore voters cannot vote honestly and resort to strategic voting.
Log in or register to post comments

Follow The Center for Election Science on: