I’m not very well-versed on all this but it seems

Edit: I don’t think this is the best, its just all I’m generally familiar with

First Past The Post

Benefits the two parties in a two-party duopoly system like that of the US. Boom or bust, black or white. When the party in power pisses you off you vote their competitor even if holding your nose.

Seems like there must be a better way, maybe just not as good for those who prefer shooting fish in a barrel

  • candybrie@lemmy.world
    0·
    10 days ago

    I think we have a different understanding of ranked choice.

    In your example, you have 3 candidates, and candidate 3 isn’t very popular. He isn’t many people’s first choice. At the end of round 1, candidate 1 has 45% of the first choice votes, candidate 2 has 46% of the first choice votes, and candidate 3 has 9% of the first choice votes. Candidate 3 is then eliminated and those who voted for him, have their votes go to their second choice candidate. That should leave either candidate 1 or 2 winning. The only way he wins is if he had more first choice votes than one of the other candidates.

    If someone who is everyone’s second choice but no one’s first choice wins, that sounds like approval voting or something similar, not ranked choice.

    • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.netEnglish
      0·
      10 days ago

      Yes, we’re talking about different things, it seems (also thanks for being civil in your reply). My apologies - your definition seems better than what my understanding was.