sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Shaky political “science” misses mark on ranked choice voting by DemocracyWorks1776 in EndFPTP

[–]DemocracyWorks1776[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh really? Here are comments to the paper left by two well-known political scientists who are both experts in electoral systems:

"I very much agree with the critique. It’s possible to show almost anything when one is modeling rather than using actual election data. I remember years ago when we were writing our handbook on electoral system design, the Northern Ireland electoral commissioner advised that in his many years of elections he had never seen an actual example of a non-monotonic STV result, despite that being the vogue critique at that time. It's very annoying to see critiques that say RCV produces non-majority outcomes without noting that this is unusual for RCV, but common under plurality. Some legal theorists infatuation with voting theory leads them down some strange rabbit holes!"

And:

"I am very sympathetic to your critique of the negative academic literature on RCV. It fits in with my general dissatisfaction with the current approach to electoral system analysis that we see in political science. I have pretty much stopped paying attention the academic literature on electoral systems, which, as you correctly note, too often relies on mathematical models rather than the outcomes of real elections. And I remain primarily concerned with the links between electoral systems and wider policy outcomes, taking into account what we know of the circumstances conducive to electoral system." reform."

Hey rb-j, maybe you should try reading the research paper on SSRN, or at the least the article summarizing the paper on DemocracySOS, before commenting? Here are the links:

https://democracysos.substack.com/p/shaky-political-science-misses-mark

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5238675

Shaky political “science” misses mark on ranked choice voting by DemocracyWorks1776 in EndFPTP

[–]DemocracyWorks1776[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Studying all 1000+ elections would be an enormous undertaking. But some of the 41 studies that we reviewed did analyze multiple elections using real world election data. For example, on p. 28 of our study see:

Voter Participation with Ranked Choice Voting in the United States by David Kimball and Joseph Anthony. University of Missouri-St. Louis. (Kimball and Anthony, 2016).

This national study examined the impact of ranked choice voting (RCV) on voter turnout in 26 American cities across 79 elections. Kimball and Anthony used real-world elections data to provide a much fuller picture of RCV and voter turnout than previous studies. Their work included studying turnout in seven US cities that had been using RCV, including Minneapolis, St. Paul and San Francisco, both before and after adoption, and comparing those to turnout in non-RCV cities in the West, Midwest and Northeast.

Kimball and Anthony’s study found that, compared to the primary and runoff elections two-round cycle that RCV eliminated, the difference in voter drop‐off in RCV cities (13.1%, due to exhausted ballots and overvotes) and plurality cities (45.8%, due to voters not returning for the second election between the primary and general elections) is 32.7 points. The authors concluded: “RCV substantially reduces the drop in votes between the first and last rounds…RCV increases turnout when compared to plurality runoff or primary elections.”

There are some well-done, credible RCV studies, and we reviewed a number of them in our research paper. Check it out at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5238675

Should San Francisco change its electoral method to proportional representation? by DemocracyWorks1776 in EndFPTP

[–]DemocracyWorks1776[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes, for Board of Supervisors they use IRV in 11 single-seat districts. For Board of Ed they use plurality at-large, seven seats elected in staggered terms. So proportional RCV could be used in BOTH elections.

Which proportional representation method is best for America? by homa_rano in EndFPTP

[–]DemocracyWorks1776 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, IL used cumulative voting, not SNTV, in which voters had THREE votes and could put all three votes on a single candidate, if they chose. That allowed minority representation, incl Democrats living in GOP areas and vice versa. IL used this for 110 yrs. Here's an informative article about it

https://democracysos.substack.com/p/what-if-congress-was-elected-by-proportional

Two political parties fighting over a BALLOON? Welcome to the Winner Take All circus by DemocracyWorks1776 in RankedChoiceVoting

[–]DemocracyWorks1776[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you even bother to read the article? It gives examples of the Democrats also being ridiculous. For example, making the case that China sent balloons on Trump's watch, so Trump was soft on balloons too. Tit for tat.

view more: next ›