Hacker News

points by nemomarx 4 days ago | 0 comments

This is probably a good support case for run-off elections being beneficial.

Ranked voting and runoff systems seem to have nothing but positives yet adoption is still lacking for some reason.

No electoral method is perfect and there are problems with Instant runoff ranked ballots. Look up "Favourite Betrayal" as a problem where ranking your most favourite incorrectly can accidentally result in your least favourite winning.

Of course just because there are technically flaws, doesn't mean it's not an improvement over the status quo.

Instant Runoff Ranked ballots are particularly well suited for electing a single position like a Mayor or President. Given that it's still a majoritarian system like First Pass the Post, it's a much more questionable system to use for other things like electing a parliament.

[–] cowlevel 4 days ago

I think IRV at least has fairly unpredictable failure cases, which means they can't be exploited.

I remember seeing a 2D chart representing voter preferences on the X and Y axis, coloured by who wins under those preferences (and some symmetry-breaking assumptions). Some systems showed clear biases towards certain outcomes. IRV had a pretty symmetric shape but with a splotch in the middle that was a random jumble of different colours - an unpredictable, chaotic outcome.

[–] gs17 4 days ago

Might have been these charts: https://www.rangevoting.org/IEVS/Pictures.html

[–] Izkata 3 days ago

Approval voting has all the upsides and none of the downsides, with the added bonus that it's simple to count and easy to explain to the average person.

[–] panick21_ 4 days ago

In Star Vote Favourite Betrayal still exists, but its very rare.

The issue is that you can't have 'Later No Harm' and 'Favorite Betrayal' at the same time.

Star Vote scores high on both but it can't be perfect.

See: https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s10602-022-09389-3?sh...

PS for those that don't know:

STAR Voting (Score Then Automatic Runoff) works in two stages: 1. Voters score candidates from 0 to 5. 2. The two candidates with the highest total scores become finalists. 3. The finalist preferred by more voters wins.

So it combines score voting and runoff. Meaning it favors centrist candidates that are prefered by most people over somebody that can turn out the base.

[–] gs17 4 days ago

> Of course just because there are technically flaws, doesn't mean it's not an improvement over the status quo.

The problem IMO is when there's better options but it's hard to get people to care enough to switch systems again. I'm hoping Ranked Robin can catch on so at least places that went to IRV can switch to a better system without new ballots.

[–] lotsofpulp 4 days ago

First past the post is beneficial for establishment parties.

[–] perilunar 4 days ago

Indeed. It tends to reinforce a two-party system. Anyone who votes third-party gets accused of 'wasting' their vote.

Preferential/ranked choice voting allows people to vote third-party while still expressing a preference for one of the majors.

[–] xvedejas 4 days ago

Depends on which ranked system. IRV has a lot of issues that other systems (like STAR, my personal preference in voting system, or Condorcet methods for instance) address much better. Non-monotonicity in particular seems like a bad property of a voting system, so I'm confused that IRV is so popular recently.

[–] gs17 4 days ago

> Non-monotonicity in particular seems like a bad property of a voting system, so I'm confused that IRV is so popular recently.

Same here. The idea of lobbying for a voting system where your vote for a candidate might hurt them, or where you might be better off not voting at all than expressing your honest preference is bizarre to me. If IRV was the only alternative, sure, but we have multiple other systems which don't have as bad tradeoffs. STAR or Ranked Robin would be so much better, but the Equal Vote Coalition doesn't seem to have the power behind it that FairVote does.

[–] creata 4 days ago

One reason IRV is popular is that it has extensive use in other countries (Australia, Ireland). It's not revolutionary but it's an improvement and nothing terrible has happened.

STAR has been used approximately nowhere. STAR is also one of the few seriously advocated-for voting methods in which it's possible for the first choice of a majority to lose, although that isn't likely to happen in practice.

[–] joveian 3 days ago

IRV is not used in Ireland except for president, a role so procedurally minor that there is an alternative used when the president is unavailable (it seems to have evolved into what could be called an artistic role). Almost all elections are multimember (3-5 member districts); the voting is done the same way but most of the issues with IRV don't apply to the multimember version or are much less severe. In Ireland, the proprotionally elected body decides the single person roles, including things like auditor or mayor.

[–] rsynnott 4 days ago

_Is_ it lacking? Most democratic systems use some form of PR and/or runoffs.

[–] lopis 4 days ago

Not Brazillian, and I didn't know about the 2-turn system, but I definitely became a fan. It's simple to understand and to implement. Ranked voting is too complex to implement and for everyone to understand. Run-off lets you vote for you preferred party first, and for the realistic contender second. Sadly, almost no one did that in Brazil - >90% voted for the finalists in the first turn.

[–] culi 3 days ago

I really strongly believe in approval/disapproval with a runoff.

You can vote for or against as many candidates as you want. Take the top 2 score getters and do a runoff. This means in the first round you can have as many candidates as you want. Those with no name recognition get no support. Also it prevents the situation so many find themselves in where both candidates are deeply unpopular but we feel we have no other choices. If the most well known candidates are deeply divisive then they won't get through.

The runoff gives people time to research the 2 candidates.

[–] polymer8563 4 days ago

two-turn systems don't help if the people aren't educated about them. I lost a friendship once over trying to argue with them that it's okay for people to vote on unpopular candidates in the 1st turn.