• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Rated Instant Runoff Voting

 
 
 
B

Blahface

Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
269
Location
Illinois
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This was an idea put out a while back by some cardinal voting reform activists to try to compromise with IRV activists. The idea is to effectively use score voting to get the top two candidates and then get the majority winner between the two candidates. So, the highest rated candidate could still lose to the next highest rated candidate if more people rated the second guy ahead of the first guy.

How do you feel about this voting method? Is it better or worse than straight score voting? Would you be okay with doing away with primaries altogether and just using this system?

My preferred voting method is non-partisan primaries with approval voting. Initially I dismissed rated-IRV when I first heard about it, but maybe it would be good for a state to use it in the Presidential election. The state could use this method to get a winner and allow the winner to decide who gets the states EC votes. That is probably the best way to get around the EC.

I don't completely trust score voting. I have no idea how voters would rate candidates they are completely ignorant about. Would a lot of them just give them a default middle score? If you had to use score voting, I think this might be better. It might be more confusing to voters than straight score voting though.
 
I'm in a different political system, but I think regardless I wouldn't be too big on that. I'd think rating would be far too inconsistent across voters. Even my preferred candidate for our next election would not get the highest rating, and my least favoured would not get the lowest. But frothing-at-the-mouth extremists probably would go for very polarized ratings.

edit: I guess if it was a 1-3 rating, that wouldn't be a problem.
 
I don't see any advantage of rating on a scale compared to approval voting either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom