November 3, 2010 7:56 PM Subscribe
I thought instant runoff/ranked choice voting was cool. But now I'm not sure...
posted by serazin to law & government (30 answers total) 3 users marked this as a favorite
Am I missing something? I just participated in my first ranked choice election. In my city, there were 10 candidates for mayor. The way I understand it is this:
If anyone gets 50% of the 1st choice vote, they win.
If no one gets 50%, then the person who got the fewest 1st choice votes has their name taken out of the hat, and the people who voted for her have their second choice votes counted instead.
This process repeats until someone gets 50%.
But what this means is that the people who vote for the most wingnut or unpopular candidate have a meaningful runnoff vote, but the people who voted for say, the third most popular candidate first don't necessarily have their second choice counted, because the 50% point may be reached before their second choice is even looked at!
My question is, am I understanding the system correctly? Is this a criticism others have raised or is it somehow addressed within the system? Bonus question: Is there another voting system that would be more "fair"?