For simpler tiebreaker purposes there is the following -- Summary - A. Vote YES/NO on each choice and rank the choices using number votes (1, 2, etc.) or use a scale vote such as 0 to 100 with 51 or more being deemed a YES vote). Using scale votes would show that many winners may not be especially popular. B. Executive and Judicial offices (1 or more positions) - Two or more choices getting YES majorities go head to head using the number votes. Legislative bodies - Both parties and individual candidates would go head to head. Head to head involves doing all of the combinations of Test Winner(s) versus Test Loser (with other choices being deemed Other Test Losers). It would generally require a computer to do all of the math in a large election. C. If head to head fails to fill all positions, then drop the choice with the lowest number of YES votes and recheck the head to head math for the remaining position(s). D. Legislative body winners would have a voting power equal to the number of votes finally received (first choice votes plus transferred votes from losers) (i.e. No STV type fractional transfer votes math to worry about.) --- For a single winner office I note again that simple Approval Voting (vote 1, X or YES for a choice) is defective since a first choice majority may lose. 51 A B 49 B B wins using simple AV That is, simple AV is defective because it fails to rank choices and have them go head to head. -- Even the simple 3 choice case is rather complex --- YES votes A AB AC ABC ACB B BA BC BAC BCA C CA CB CAB CBA That is, there are 15 possible types of YES votes with the simple summary matrix -- Place Vote 1 2 3 Total A1 A2 A3 AT B1 B2 B3 BT C1 C2 C3 CT For legislative bodies - If a party gets N Droop Quotas, then it would get N seats. Using the lowest YES votes as a tiebreaker would replace having to look at worst head to head defeats.
