[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote- Do we have a consensus that the instant runoff vote (IRV) is MATHEMATICALLY better than the common two step plurality vote (primary) with a follow-up runoff between the 2 top plurality vote getters? It seems to me that it cannot be worse, given that manipulation is bad. As far as I can see, the only mathematically provable difference between them is that IRV is less manipulatable. They share the same faults, including non-monotonicity. With 3 candidates, I believe they are mathematically identical. --- D- How about 4 or more candidates ???
Plurality only looks at first choice votes. IRV only looks at first choice votes plus transferred first choice votes (especially in single winner cases). Which is a better consensus --- a train wreck or a plane wreck ??? Reality -- the 3 standard tables (at least) --- YES/NO Head to Head Place Votes (for all places)
